Hidden Creek -- Top 100 Modern

[Geoffrey Childs]

Matt: I think the first thing you have to do is to limit yourself to the modern courses in comparing HC with other New Jersey venues.  You simply cannot build a course today and somehow claim that it should be compared to Plainfield, Somerset Hills, Baltusrol and so on.  

Jerry

No offense but - Yes you can build a course today that can compare and EXCEED those you mentioned.

Friars Head, Sand Hills and Pac Dunes do just that.

[THuckaby2]

redanman - I am SO glad you caught that - I was wondering if anyone would... because yep, I meant that as a double entendre/pun/whatever, given JakaB's religious bent.

Of course it works as alter ego, also.  Altar is just way more fun.

TH

[Jerry Kluger]

Geoff:  Are you implying that C & C could have built a course of the quality that you mention on the parcel of land they had in New Jersey?  I got the distinct impression from Bill's presentation as well as talking to him on the course that he feels that this was the best course that they could build on that property in the manner which they feel comfortable building a course.  If you combine minimalism and the property in question, and your end result is HC, then I think the project is very much a success.

[George Pazin]

Mike -

One of the other things Tom says is that anything ranked 7 or higher has his stamp of approval. I'd be surprised if HC didn't receive it as well.

You're right, to a degree. People tend to get more caught up in where HC fits into the rankings scheme than appreciate what it has. But I still believe it exemplifies much of what is great about golf from a different angle.

I guess the "wow" factor doesn't really do it for me when it comes to discussing golf courses.

Huck -

I'll be honored to be the first out of towner to join you at ST.

[THuckaby2]

Huck -

I'll be honored to be the first out of towner to join you at ST.

Well that would be very cool and the honor would be mine.  I just have to figure that if ye gets ye-self out here, we will provide opportunities at courses that are, let's just say, higher on the Doak scale.  

 

But still ST does have an allure of its own.  You too can see what $50+ green fees get you here in CA.

Of course more importantly though, you would have to also take a quick peek at the trophy case.

 

[Geoffrey Childs]

Jerry

You're changing the playing field with that last post of yours.

Of course HC is a huge success.  Read my other posts in this thread.  It's a fantastic course that I said I would travel regularly over 100 miles to play if I could swing a National Membership.  How much more praise do you want from me?

However, you asked "Matt: I think the first thing you have to do is to limit yourself to the modern courses in comparing HC with other New Jersey venues.  You simply cannot build a course today and somehow claim that it should be compared to Plainfield, Somerset Hills, Baltusrol and so on."

You said nothing about the parcel of land. You said it couldn't be done ("You simply cannot build a course today and somehow claim that it should be compared to Plainfield, Somerset Hills, Baltusrol and so on")

I simply said that MODERN MINIMALIST COURSES moving little dirt can in fact exceed those you mentioned (all of which I've played).  Examples are Friars Head, Sand Hills and Pac Dunes.

Do you disagree?

[Mike_Cirba]

Mike -

One of the other things Tom says is that anything ranked 7 or higher has his stamp of approval. I'd be surprised if HC didn't receive it as well.

George;

Actually, Tom Doak's quote is that anything ranked 5 or higher has his approval.  

I'm guessing that he would like Hidden Creek a great deal.  Whether he would have it in the rarified air of his 8's, 9's etc. I'm not really certain.

Jerry Kluger;

You made a point that underlies much of this discussion.  In my mind, C&C really utilized the property well in creating Hidden Creek.  However, to be fair, on a Doak Scale the property is about a 4 or 5.  

[Jerry Kluger]

I guess that my feelings are pretty strong that there is an inherent difference between the classical and the modern courses.  I appreciate each of the courses you mentioned but how would you compare them with Pine Valley; I think you admire them but you don't attempt to maintain that any one of them is better than Pine Valley.  What you say is that they are great golf courses built on great pieces of property which is what I got from Bill Coore's presentation and as of now Sand Hills is the best that modern architects have been able to produce.  The question which we might consider is whether we are too biased toward the minimalists and we fail to recognize that those who do not fall in that category are better than we give them credit for.  

[mike_malone]

 Jerry,



    Those unwilling to put HC at the top are grappling with the limits of minimalism.  If you just put it on the land and the land is not significantly interesting, can it be great? They feel that without some unusual features  added that it lacks the topography  necessary to get  to those highest spots. Some of them are puting a Fazio course ahead of it. I think this shows an openmindedness towards alternative design concepts. (I have not played Galloway.)

    Just down the road Twisted Dune decided to create unusual artificial dunes. The playability versus trees appeals to me. The framing is almost the equal of trees. This is just one example of potential unusual features. Beyond that the course between the dunes is quite minimalist in feel.

[Geoffrey Childs]

I guess that my feelings are pretty strong that there is an inherent difference between the classical and the modern courses.  I appreciate each of the courses you mentioned but how would you compare them with Pine Valley; I think you admire them but you don't attempt to maintain that any one of them is better than Pine Valley.  

Jerry

I'm going to take off my GW hat and make Huck very happy by saying that of course you CAN compare older and newer designs because some new ones are in fact CLASSICS.  I feel that Tom Doak and Bill Coore and Ben Crenshaw would feel cheated if thier work were not at some point put into perspective using the entire field as measure of greatness.

In that respect, Friars head, Sand Hills and Pacific Dunes pass the test with flying colors. They are instant classics and among the greatest examples of golf course architecture ever.

With respect to Pine Valley you have raised the bar to the roof. Some like Gene and Huck would say yes - Sand Hills is the greatest in the world and I can't argue with them.  I think Pine Valley is tops but at that level we are nitpicking as I would pick NGLA as the course I would like to play given only one choice. Someone else might like Cypress Point or TOC.

[THuckaby2]

GC - just wanted you to know I read that and yes, I am very pleased.

And you are so right on re your assessment of courses at the top - it's so close, such a matter of preference, there can be no right or wrong.

Only Gene and I are right.  
 

[Jerry Kluger]

Mike: I played Twisted Dune and enjoyed it but it is totally based upon framing of the holes through the use of mounding which the architect felt was necessary because of the poor quality of the land for a golf course.  The holes themselves are much more restrained and pleasing but Blue Heron Pines is on a similar piece of property and Smyers did not find a need to frame each hole and came away with a pretty good result.  

I think people like Galloway because the holes do work well with the land and it does not seem that he was trying to impress you with the size and quality of each hole.

[Jerry Kluger]

Geoff: I know this subject has been kicked around quite a bit but I have to bring Shadow Creek into the equation.  Not everyone likes it but it an incredible piece of golf course architecture -- of course it is not minimalism but does that mean that it is not a significant piece of architecture in the history of golf.  BTW, I asked Bill Coore if he would have built Shadow Creek if Steve Wynn had approached him and he said no -- that says something about what he believes in which I greatly admire.

[Matt_Ward]

George P:

The issue is not "penalizing" HC but the other Jersey layouts that out of area people do not see. Many of the raters are simply interlopers or groupies who come to see one particular layout / architectural design and then heap a number on it without any local / regional cross comparison reference point.

No doubt -- you have your preferences -- so do I.

If HC is indeed a top 100 course then Jersey is being shortchanged by no less than 4-5 other courses -- not including PV, Plainfield, etc, etc.

Gents:

Just because someone (whether it be C&C or anyone else for that matter) does well with a given site -- it doesn't mean that such a success then easily translates itself into the kind of success that trumps all the other notable Jersey layouts that I mentioned. Too many people simply come to the Garden State and do the "hit and run" reviews of PV, Plainfield, Somerset Hills, Baltusrol and now Hidden Creek.

Guess what guys -- there's plenty of beef in my home state that's simply ignored or forgotten.

One other point -- I don't see the need to split between courses built from yesteryear and those from the most recent genesis. Reviews can be done with the appropriate analysis. Anyone playing the Garden State will know the depth of courses is considerable given the limited amount of land for golf.

Jerry K:

When Golf Mag throws Hidden Creek into their top 100 I believe it's fair game to analyze courses together -- whether they were built in 2005 or 1905.

[George Pazin]

Matt -

You highlight an issue that I would think is a real problem in most if not all of the rankings - self fulfilling prophecies of a sort.

How many raters not from NYC get to the Big Apple and then seek out Quaker Ridge, Fenway, Engineers, etc?

How many get to NJ and seek out Hollywood or any of the other course you mention?

How many get to Philly and seek out LuLu, Phily Cricket, French Creek?

How many get to Pittsburgh and seek out Fox Chapel, Field Club, Allgeheny, Edgewood, or even Sunnehanna in Johnstown?

I know Brad makes a real effort to "assign" certain courses to raters so that they can try to be more balanced. Do any of the other panels do so?

I still think the biggest issues with ratings are outside of this issue, but it certainly is a significant one.

[Mike Worth]

Matt Ward

I noticed that you avoided the question put to you by several posters -- have you been back to play HC yet?

[Mike Nuzzo]

...anything ranked 7 or higher has his stamp of approval.

5 or higher - means it's good enough to play.

As for Hucksters interpretation of the scale it's not the first time he's loused it up...

5 - well above average - not worth setting a day aside for
6 - very good course - worth a game in town, not necessarily a special trip to see
7 - Excellent - worth checking out if within 50-100 miles -  soundly designed, interesting holes, good conditioning, and pretty setting, if not anything unique
8 - One of the very best courses in its region.  Some drawbacks, but these will be clearly spelled out, and will make up for them with something really special to the generally excellent layout.
9 - Outstanding
10 - Nearly Perfect

Sounds like an 8 to me, if there are some drawbacks the setting and green complexes ensure it's an 8.



p.s.  Plainfield may have been a 7 in 1987, it's not anymore.

[Jerry Kluger]

Mike: I presume that you view Plainfield as even better since Gil Hanse's work.

[Matt_Ward]

Jerry:

I loved Plainfield prior to the involvement of Hanse / Bahto and believe their work after-the-fact has been a tremendous plus to its overall standing notwithstanding the ignorance of Digest in having the course plummet 50 spots on the top 100 ratings.

Let me also mention that comparing courses of different time periods is fair game. Others may opt to provide some sort of rationale against it as you seem to suggest. HC for me is a fine layout -- but the sheer ignorance of other Jersey course demonstrates for me the "groupie" mentality at work here.

George:

I have suggested a variety of ways to strengthen the ratings procedures -- e.g. -- having a regional / local panel and then having a really national panel -- Digest formerly used to do this. If a rater only simply cherry picks courses and fails when coming especially to the Northeast to see what else exists then the outcomes are a preordained matter. Given the natural pedigree of solid courses in the Northeast I would hope -- check that -- expect a rater of any standing to go beyond the "usual suspects" as you indicated in your last post.

New Jersey is much more than just Pine Valley and Baltusrol. No doubt they hog the lion's share of attention but the pedigree of unique, fun and intricate designs extends to a broader number of courses.

I salute HC's success because it's a gain for the Garden State and to golf overall. However, the real issue rests with people who need to go beyond the "flavor of the month club" courses and those who simply travel to see particular designers.

SS1:

I have not been back since my original visit. If time permits and the club allows I might just venture back sometime this season.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tom Huckaby,

I wouldn't fly across the country to play ANY golf course.

Mike Cirba,

If the greens hadn't been recently topdressed causing them to putt at about 7, and were running at about 10-11 do you think evaluations-rankings would be higher ?

[Mike_Cirba]

...anything ranked 7 or higher has his stamp of approval.

5 or higher - means it's good enough to play.

As for Hucksters interpretation of the scale it's not the first time he's loused it up...

7 - Excellent - worth checking out if within 50-100 miles -  soundly designed, interesting holes, good conditioning, and pretty setting, if not anything unique
8 - One of the very best courses in its region.  Some drawbacks, but these will be clearly spelled out, and will make up for them with something really special to the generally excellent layout.
9 - Outstanding
10 - Nearly Perfect

Sounds like an 8 to me, if there are some drawbacks the setting and green complexes ensure it's an 8.

Mike Nuzzo,

I bet even Tom Doak doesn't like his vanilla, generic description of what an "8" is.  By that description, Hidden Creek is an 8 but then again so is Twisted Dune, Galloway, Atlantic City, and probably others in the "region".  

I'd rather compare it against the courses that he actually gave "8"s and above to, with and outside the region (as I listed back a page or two ago), and there aren't a whole lot of those.

Patrick;

The greens were fine...very good in fact, and not one person in our group griped about any putting or approach issues.  

We all recognize that it's been a late spring and it would have been ridiculous for anyone to hold that against their opinion of the course.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Redanman,

I wouldn't fly across an ocean to play any golf course either.

[Mike Nuzzo]

Mike C.
Good point.

Part of my thought process is he gave Plainfield a 7, I disagree.

Here is my setup...
Of the top 200 courses in usa.
Bottom 100 get a 7
Next 60 get an 8
Next 30 get a 9
Next 10 get a 10

I have no idea if my numbers add up, I've never written them down.  I just guess.

Cheers

[Geoffrey Childs]

Tom Huckaby,

I wouldn't fly across the country to play ANY golf course.

Pat

Didn't you make a trip to see Bandon and Pacific Dunes?

Are you going to Nebraska in a couple of weeks with the specific thought of seeing Sand Hills and winning yet another match against Ran   ?

[ed_getka]

Geoffrey,
  Just what I was thinking. Thats a long drive to Sand Hills, he must REALLY want to see it.