[Steve_ Shaffer]

A typical Bill Coore-Ben Crenshaw golf course design is atypical. That's what sets them apart from most other golf architects. They don't like big, bold, in-your-face golf holes. Their holes hug the land, the way they want our golf shots to hug the land. OK, maybe some their greens are big and bold, but only when that fits the surroundings, so that we're left to believe that the ground was like that before, all humpy and lumpy.

Yawning sand bunkers that shout at us from a distance are not their style. They prefer bunkers that merely hint at their existence down a fairway. Edged in thick grass, a Coore-Crenshaw bunker looks more like a raised eyebrow or a furrowed brow than a gaping mouth.

Coore and Crenshaw's work is different from those of most other architects, even when they're working in the same basic terrain. Like the Sonoran Desert, for instance, where every golf course pretty much looks like every other golf course. That's evident at their latest, the Saguaro Course at We-Ko-Pa Golf Club in Fort McDowell, Ariz., just east of Scottsdale, which opened in early December,2006.

Here's the rest of the review:

http://tinyurl.com/yrr6mt


www.golfdigest.com/courses/critic/index.ssf?/courses/critic/wekopa.html

[Matt_Ward]

Steve:

I played the new C & C course today and frankly have to say that my opinion is a mixed bag. There will be devotees of the twosome who will gush on and on about how it is leaps and bounds beyond other top notch daily fee facilities within the Valley of the Sun -- but I don't see it that way.

Part of the issue with the new course is that the grow-in -- while very complete has caused the course to play extremely slow. I can fully understand this because it's critical to get the grass coverage prior to all the high heat patterns that will soon develop as the year progresses.

The layout is really a case of two tales. The front nine, for the lack of a better word, is quite tame / boring, fill in the proper word. In simple terms -- the C&C mantra has been to provide a "less is more" formula. The front nine speaks to the issue of "less being even less so" IMHO.

Few of the holes on the front really cause one to take notice. The opening hole is a long par-4 of roughly 470 yards from the tips but it lacks anything meaningful from a design basis.

To the credit of the designers and the development team -- the 2nd 18 at We-Ko-Pa does offer plenty of width in the driving zones and doesn't follow the tired yet predictable motif of so many other pure desert courses in being an "all or nothing" exercise in negotiating tee shots when playing. The width is there -- what's missing on the front side is the design specifics that C & C have excelled in other layouts I have had the opportunity in playing.

The back nine is where C & C move forward with a wide arry of compelling holes -- the terrain is better and the change of pace situations are more complex and far richer in their demands. Time is short for me now to go into considerable detail but the sum of what I encountered was two different stories. Where elements are first rate the course does deliver -- but I cannot write-off the disappointing holes you see far too often on the front half.

I would need to play the course again when the turf conditions were firmer and see how the element of the bounce adds to the design. Right now -- I'd still opt to play a nearby neighbor SunRidge Canyon for a better overall experience.

[Matt_Ward]

What's interesting about the 2nd 18 at We-Ko-Pa is that it offers ample width but save for the last 6-7 holes of the round there's little strategic dimensions to the course. It does cut a fine picture with the desert backdrop and the mountains that frame the course in the nearby distance.

At just over 6,900 yards the course is not long by any contemporary standard but frankly there is just way too many mediocre holes -- that even the stellar finish cannot bail out here.

In playing the course I was hoping for a bit of magic -- but the beginning salvo of holes provides nothing more than just empty blanks.

For those wondering if the 2nd 18 tops the original 18 by Scott Miller -- my answer is an emphatic no. The overall complexity of the routing of the original course -- the sheer qualities of the individual holes on the first course is still the better choice.

If the C & C layout had more holes in the nature of the ones from #12 through the finish -- then things would be quite different indeed. Reputation alone -- cannot elevate the nature of the 2nd 18 at We-Ko-Pa simply because the designers have such credits to their names as Sand Hills and Friar's Head. In fact -- I would have hoped for something a good bit more GIVEN the strength of what they have done previously.

The new Saguaro course is not lame by any means -- but for those to proclaim it automatically jumps to the top of the heap or anywhere near the top 5-6 public courses in all of Arizona needs to take some refresher courses on the risign bar of golf in the Grand Canyon State.

All one needs to do is travel the short distance to the Keith Foster design at SunRidge Canyon and you can see a superb piece of property and a dynamic routing that makes you earn it throughout each shot / hole.

Be curious to hear the comments of others who have played the course and have a bit more knowledge on the Arizona public golf scene.

[John Kirk]

Matt,

There was a fairly extensive thread on Brad Klein's We-Ko-Pa review a couple weeks ago.  Brad liked We-Ko-Pa quite a bit.  I bumped it to the top of the heap to coincide with this thread.

I haven't played We-Ko-Pa.  As always, your educated opinion (in this case somewhat contrary), and willingness to express it, are appreciated.

[Matt_Ward]

John:

Part of the issue is that there are certain architects who get a bit more attention from their PAST work and often times people can fail to assess the course in question.

I don't doubt the skills and talents of C&C -- but the 2nd 18 at We-Ko-Pa didn't do it for me. I liked the last third of the course because the terrain got a bit more interesting and the holes were wonderfully done. But when people say the work is subtle that's a nice spin from having to use the word dull or uninspiring.

Like I said -- send me to KF's SunRidge Canyon anytime as the better choice. Ditto the work Scott Miller did with the original 18.

[Steve_ Shaffer]

Matt

What about the walkability factor at Saguaro as compared to Cholla or Sunridge Canyon?

Steve

[Eric_Terhorst]

Matt,

Could you please tell us specifically what you found derivative or boring about 1, 4, 7, and 8, my favorite holes on the front?  To me #1 is a very solid welcoming design, requiring two good shots to make par but leaving some room in the width of the fairway and in between the scrub that crosses the fairway and the green for players who are not perfect on the first hole.  Together with the natural rolling terrain that sets the tone for the course and the day, I think these design elements make this a successful opener.  Can't understand how you found it so dull.

4 and 8, the par 5s, I thought were exciting puzzles, with plenty of options that would make these fun to play day to day.  7 is a great uphill short hole--exciting blind tee shot with choices ranging from 5-iron to 325-yd driver if you've got the game, and IMO excellent bunkering.  

Looking at the web site for your course of choice, SunRidge Canyon, I see on the front page the words "Signature Hole"  and "Prolink GPS"  and my immediate reaction is   The diagram of the 14th hole doesn't inspire confidence (talk about derivative!!), and--though I've never played it--I see nothing that would make me want to make that "experience" a priority.  Except that it was praised by a GCAer...

[Matt_Ward]

Eric:

I could care less about how specific courses market themselves with such trite and meaningless terms as "signature holes", etc, etc, etc. The essence of the course is the course itself.

I really like what Keith Foster did with SunRidge -- the layout features housing that flanks the property and is often set high above the natural canyon from which the bulk of the holes reside.

Eric, please help me understand -- you have not played SunRidge but you are quick to label the course a non-prioirity. That's no small feat -- the wherewithal to tag a course as being less than the 2nd 18 at We-Ko-Pa and you have not done the heavy lifting of actually playing it. You lost me there because your credibility comes off as clearly lacking.

Eric, frankly Hidden Creek is a better overall design than their effort in the AZ desert. The course doesn't really inspire me from the high bar of others I have played from the talented tandem. However, I don't simply give away bonus points to any architect or tandem simply because of past work.

Time doesn't permit me to go at length on the holes you mentioned but trust me I will respond. Just do yourself a favor -- before taking umbrage at me about other courses I would recommend -- try to play them or hold back your comments accordingly.

Steve:

I don't give brownie points on the issue of walking versus non-walking as some do. I think it's a nice addition to the course but the real deal that I look at specifically is how well the overall holes work with another.

[Joe Hancock]

Eric, please help me understand -- you have not played SunRidge but you are quick to label the course a non-prioirity. That's no small feat -- the wherewithal to tag a course as being less than the 2nd 18 at We-Ko-Pa and you have not done the heavy lifting of actually playing it. You lost me there because your credibility comes off as clearly lacking.
 

Matt,

There's many courses I have not played that are not on my priority list. There are also many courses I haven't played that are on my priority list.

How do you set your priorities as to what to play before you have a chance to play them? Or, is it merely grasping at straws and you play whatever course is close to your hotel room? I'm sure that isn't the case. So, how is Eric's credibilty ruined because he has a method of setting priorities? Only in that his method is different from yours?

Joe

[Andy Troeger]

Eric,
FWIW...I would normally agree with your take. However, I just played SunRidge Canyon about two weeks ago and as Matt said it really is worth playing and a very enjoyable round. You could walk it, but they did not recommend it in the pro shop and I would think the climb at the end would be pretty challenging...doable though.

I did not play either course at We-Ko-Pa, but I did play Talking Stick North on the same trip. TSN is well designed to be sure, but I'd go back to SunRidge first.  If you go back a week or so in the archives here you'll find a relatively short thread on it with a couple pictures including #14.

[Eric_Terhorst]

I really like what Keith Foster did with SunRidge -- the layout features housing that flanks the property and is often set high above the natural canyon from which the bulk of the holes reside.

Eric, please help me understand -- you have not played SunRidge but you are quick to label the course a non-prioirity. That's no small feat -- the wherewithal to tag a course as being less than the 2nd 18 at We-Ko-Pa and you have not done the heavy lifting of actually playing it. You lost me there because your credibility comes off as clearly lacking.

...I don't simply give away bonus points to any architect or tandem simply because of past work.

Just do yourself a favor -- before taking umbrage at me about other courses I would recommend -- try to play them or hold back your comments accordingly.

Steve:

I don't give brownie points on the issue of walking versus non-walking as some do.

Matt,

As to umbrage, I took none from your comments nor was I trying to dole any out.  I felt differently about Saguaro, so I am trying to understand.

Clearly we have differences in taste.  Regarding courses that can't be walked, and contrived water holes in the middle of the desert, I'm sure my opinion of those things won't keep you from enjoying them if that's what you like.  As to housing that flanks the course, there are a few villages in Scotland where it works.  At Pebble Beach and Pasatiempo I don't care, but most other places where I've seen it in the U.S., it detracts from the "experience."

You used that word experience in your first post, so in an effort to understand what you found attractive about the alternative, I checked out what kind of "experience" SunRidge Canyon is selling.  You may not care what the web site says, and again I say "To each his own!" But I have limited time and money to play golf, especially on brief visits to Scottsdale, so  I have to prioritize.  I will check this fabulous web site and others for ideas.  When the course's marketing features the GPS system as one of the attractions, it's a good bet that course is not for me, and I understand that they could care less--they'll get along fine without me.  

Alas, I know little of Mr. Foster's work--mostly that is because Foster and my time and money haven't crossed paths--not because I am trying to avoid him.  Now you and Andy have both praised SunRidge Canyon so maybe I should go see it.

It's true, I don't have much wherewithal, and I will admit to being slightly addicted to golf consumption by reputation.  Based on what I've seen (just three courses!--so much more to do!) I want to play everything by C&C.  The same goes for Dye, Doak, Stranz, Fazio, Ross, Langford, MacKenzie, MacDonald, Raynor, Tillinghast, and a host of others...

[Eric_Terhorst]

Matt, just curious, what's up with the repetitive "2nd 18 at We-Ko-Pa"?   You don't care for the names Saguaro and Cholla?

[Matt_Ward]

Joe:

The immediate Phoenix / Scottsdale area is one I am well familiar with as I have been playing golf in the region for a quarter of a century. When I hear of anything that has some merit to it I try to make it my business to play it.

I never said my opinions are the only ones that count but I do insist that those (e.g. Eric, et al) who take issue with mine show a bit more credibility on the subject when they downplay courses I have recommended (e.g. SunRidge Canyon) and they have FAILED to play them. I appreciate people doing their field research from personal experiences not just surfing Websites and being critical of what a respective course says about itself (e.g. signature holes, et al).

Joe, the new C&C layout is one that will likely have plenty of fanfare given the fact of who C&C are and the work they have done previously. But work done "previously" is not the same thing as to the merits / lack thereof of the course in question here. Too often people here on GCA demonstrate the "preferred architect(s)" and those who are "least preferred." That's fair enough but the work at Saguaro at We-Ko-Pa (e.g. the 2nd 18) is simply not at the level of other desert area courses within the greater Valley of the Sun area and I see the Scott Miller original 18 and SunRidge Canyon -- both in the immediate neighborhood being superior.

Eric:

Before you can tell me if the routing / land usage of SunRidge Canyon works or doesn't work -- you need to play the course and decide from firsthand experience. Otherwise, it's nothing more than pumping in opinions from second and third hand sources at best. You took issue with the manner by which the ownership at SunRidge Canyon advertises itself. I frankly find that completely irrelevant. The proof for me is the taste and the taste I see from Keith Foster's work there is very good. You won't know and can't say I am wrong simply because you have not played the course to back up your inferences from a direct account.

Eric, you do yourself a grave injustice personally and to how you are perceived on this site when you simply base your golf tastes on what a Website says. How bout checking things out with those who have a good bit of experience with the varied layouts that dot the Valley of the Sun. You place credence in the Website but fail to understand what others who have played the course have said.

One last thing -- Eric it might behoove you (simply a suggestion) to expand your architectural pool of designers you wish to see. I have found that many talented people are doing work -- Keith Foster is certainly one of them with such layouts like Haymaker in Steamboat Springs, CO, Coral Canyon in St. George, UT and SunRidge Canyon, to name just three. I have no issue with the names you mentioned but don't fall for the belief that all of the names you mentioned hits home runs with each effort. That's not the case.

Last point -- I didn't say the new Saguaro layout is a dog, however, when held against the standard of other C&C layouts it's not at the highest of levels IMHO. The concluding 7 holes from #12 on to the conclusion is well done. Unfortunately, I failed to see anything of memorable qualities with the others. I will certainly flush out my thoughts on this shortly.

 

[Joe Hancock]

Matt,

I have no issue with how you see, judge and otherwise analize golf courses. I'm just saying that others may have different priorities than you, and have their own preferred methods as to how they end up playing, or not...any golf course thay have yet to see.

I didn't question your knowledge of Phoenix/ Scottsdale, or Arizona, or C&C, or any other resort. The only thing I questioned is your rather harsh condemnation when others use a different method of deciding what to see, play and say.

Joe

[Forrest Richardson]

As for the walk-ability of Saguaro (or, to get Eric going: The 2nd nine at We-Ko-Pa) it was very walkable with the assist-carts they offer. The finishing holes were a hike, especially after 13-14 mostly graceful grades.

I think I know what Matt is saying — it mirrors some of my questions and observations. The primary question being: Is passive and minimal enough? Should a golf course provide more one-of-a-kind holes...ones that you cannot find anywhere else?

[Tom_Doak]

I haven't played either course at We-Ko-Pa, but Matt seems to imply the first course is just as good or even better ... so Forrest, does that course have a bunch of holes you cannot find anywhere else?

I have played Sun Ridge Canyon, and thought it was pretty good, although the last three holes seemed to be very forced attempts at drama.

[Forrest Richardson]

I have never set foot on Sunridge Canyon. But I see it from the air on each and every approach back home. (I had been considered to design Sunridge, so perhaps my avoidance of the place has something to do with that...no excuse however.)

My personal observation is that Saguaro is very tame. Some will like this and applaud the restraint. And, no, there really are not any holes that you could safely say are unique. The uphill par-4 I mentioned on the other thread was very interesting. Unfortunately it came exactly as the sun was going down and it was all we could do to keep track of each other's tee shots. I liked in during construction and I want to go back to that tee — before noon.

[Tom_Doak]

Forrest:

I was asking if the Cholla course had any special holes that would put it above the Saguaro, as Matt implied.

[Forrest Richardson]

Oh, I am sorry not to read more carefully. There is a great par-3 that plays to a blind cove. And, a terrific par-5 that meanders down a draw to a verrrrrrrrrrrrrrrry tight green. I shudder to even think how it was built. The 18th is "unique", but not my cup of tea. Water, water, water.

I suppose it has some unique holes. But somehow I like Saguaro better even with that comparison.

Is that confusing enough?

[Eric_Terhorst]

Matt,

Ever since I played the 3rd 18 at Bandon, Oregon, I've wanted to see every course C&C built.  So far, I've liked three of 'em a great deal, so I will make it a priority to see some more.

Ever since I for the first time played golf while being transported in a motorized cart with a GPS system, on land that seemed perfectly suitable for a golf course that a human with two legs could walk, I never *wanted* to do it again.  I will do it again, but I won't make it a priority to seek out courses where I am forced to do so.  To the extent I have time and money to play golf, I will choose courses that are designed to be enjoyed by walkers.

Ever since I watched my petite and lovely wife carry her own clubs around a man-size golf course, including most recently the 3rd and 4th nines at We-Ko-Pa, one of which I understand from reading your posts is pretty good, and the 18 on the north side of Talking Stick, I don't understand why a full-grown person of either sex would want to play golf while using a motorized cart.  Especially as it often requires traipsing back and forth to the infernal cart paths, which in turn blight the landscape of most of the courses they're found on.

I also don't understand why you found the 3rd nine at We-Ko-Pa boring, as you haven't really told us why.  All I did was ask you to explain, and tell you how I felt about certain characteristics found (ad nauseam, IMO) on certain types of golf courses, including (I understand, based on admittedly limited information) the course in the canyon at SunRidge.  In response, you let it be known that I have body odor and other personal problems.

Verily, I am crushed and downhearted.

But I will take to heart your suggestion that I need to expand my architectural tastes.   Since he hasn't taken umbrage at anything that I've posted, and especially because he's not the designer of the course in the canyon at SunRidge, I am going to make it a priority to seek out Forrest Richardson's work.  

I am sure he waits breathlessly for my reviews...

[Matt_Ward]

Joe:

There's little doubt that people can and will have different priorities. You must have missed my point -- I was taken to task about my recommendations of a specific course by someone who told me a different take simply from having referenced comments from a Website.

Did you understand that?

Joe, your usually with the program in most cases but when someone questions my recommendations and has nothing to offer but the course's Website as proof that the respective course is lacking something is definitely missing. Respectfully, how you fail to understand that is beyond me.

Forrest:

Great use of the word "restrained" - which can mean boredom when spun by others. I don't see the what's there with Saguaro -- beyond the holes I did mention at the outset. If people really believe this is public desert golf at the highest then frankly it's merely the association of name-itis with the tandem that's done the work here.

You read me right -- the restrained and passive elements simply are geared towards a "less is less" reality for me. I don't see the many interesting elements you find with other public desert layouts that I have already named.

Yes, the course has plenty of width but there's no advantage gained to playing to one side or the other in most situations. The views are spectacular but there's plenty of other desert courses that can match that aspect. Candidly, if someone played the course and did not know the names of C&C were the architects of record the issue of how the course fares from a review perspective would likely be much different.

[Forrest Richardson]

Firstly, I enjoyed Saguaro very much. I give it high marks.

I think a thread last year in which I posed the question of whether "minimalist" design is, in and of itself, a trend as we sit here after the year 2000...? Certainly a minimalist approach transcends eras, regions and even sites. But, my question is whether it is being used appropriately in this day and age.

[Eric_Terhorst]

Forrest,

It seems to me that it's easier to build a "one-of-a-kind" hole with, for example, a bulldozer or an artificial water hazard, than to produce one from natural terrain.  Then there is a bell-shaped curve of unique holes, from horrendous to (if you're an architect) why-didn't-I-think-of-that--whether they are natural or artificial.  IMO, it's also easier to produce an abominable hole with a bulldozer or a water hazard.   But I like just about everything about Whistling Straits and that is totally manufactured.

On the other hand, I don't like much of what of I've seen of PGA West out in Palm Springs, but I've only looked at the web site  

In Anatomy of a Golf Course, Tom Doak says: "With the advent of modern construction equipment, the ability of the architect to reconfigure the landscape has increased a hundredfold.  Theoretically, we should be able to foresee all the best natural holes to be found on a property and integrate them with the best holes of our imagination."

Are you saying that minimalists, in the pursuit of "100% natural" 1) may be missing opportunities to "integrate" the natural resource with the benefits offered by technology and brainpower, and 2) may cause the pendulum to swing too far, and thereby risk becoming trendy to the point of annoyance?  

[Jim Franklin]

I just got through playing SunRidge Canyon, Saguaro, Talking Stick North, and Eagle Mountain and thought Talking Stick North was by far the least impressive. I was shocked that so many holes were the same. To a man in my event (24), TSN was a HUGE letdown. Eagle Mountain offered far more variety and certainly more elevation changes.

As for the first two, I liked Saguaro as it had some elevation changes, it offered a variety of shots to play, and was a great walking course. SunRidge had some interesting green sites and was more of a challenge than Saguaro. I also played SunRidge in horrible weather so that may have made it more difficult as well.

[Tom Dunne]

Eric: I don't think it's beyond the realm of possibility that "minimalism" misapplied could ruin a world-class piece of golf property someday.

Regarding Saguaro, I posted a bunch of pics a while back--I think it's a terrific golf course. I also think Forrest's question is really interesting and worth exploring: "Is passive and minimal enough...should a golf course provide more one-of-a-kind holes?"

My first thought was C.B. Macdonald's quote: "In reality, there are only four or five good holes in golf...the local scenery provides the variety." (Not sure if I think the number is as small as four or five, but it does provide an early ward--no pun intended--against a novelty-at-all-costs approach.)

And then I thought of Talking Stick North, which Jim Franklin referred to after I clicked refresh on this thread. C&C's work at TSN is remarkable given that there was absolutely nothing resembling golfing land there. Bill Coore told me once that when they began working with that site, you could place a soda bottle  at one end of the site, walk all the way to the other side and still see that same bottle. I suspect the closest Doak analogue would be the Rawls course. Jim, I know your group was far from the first to be underwhelmed by Talking Stick--I'm curious, though, about your take on #2. I think this hole, in its own restrained ()way, is very much the type of hole that won't be found too many other places. It's flat, it's wide, and I bet tons of golfers look at it and think, "what a snooze". But I really like the options it offers.

As for Sunridge Canyon, I believe I'm playing it next week. I'll be sure to take a bunch of photos for the treehouse....

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()