[Mike_Cirba]

some excellent points Patrick

I think Cascata is at least a Doak 6

A breathtaking site in the Nevada mountains - $10,000,000

An unlimited budget to create a majestic, magical golf wonderland - $50,000,000

A Doak Scale 6 - Priceless

[Paul Payne]

The palm trees could be tolerable but desert golf should never include waterfalls and ponds.

Maybe I am way off.... maybe a nice chimney rock formation behind the green on #4 at Sand Hills would add some charm.

[Patrick_Mucci]

some excellent points Patrick

I think Cascata is at least a Doak 6

A breathtaking site in the Nevada mountains - $10,000,000

A breathtaking site ?

You must be kidding.

What's breathtaking about the site ?

Oh, you mean the surrounding mountains and hills that aren't any part of the site that the golf course sits on, sort of like an Ocean in the backround, or the Shadow Creek effect.

By necessity the golf course must weave its way through those hills, mountains, draws and canyons.

If the site is so "breathtaking" as you put it, why can't you walk it ?  It's NOT a good site for golf.  It's a good site for golf in Las Vegas, and there's a difference.

First Fazio gets bashed for taking a desert flash flood zone and making it an unusual, but good golf course, other guys are bashed for duplicating famous holes and now Rees is bashed for siting the golf course that weaves through the canyons.[/color]

An unlimited budget to create a majestic, magical golf wonderland - $50,000,000

Mike, that's blatant B.S.
Where did you get the information that they had an unlimited budget ?

Where did you get the information that the golf course cost
$ 50,000,000 to build ?  That's also blatant B.S. and another indication that you'll go to any lengths to bash Rees, even if it includes fabricating information and distorting the facts.

You have an obligation to be intellectually honest.
You should take that obligation seriously.[/color]

A Doak Scale 6 - Priceless

That's one man's opinion.

Although, Tom Doak's opinion of Shadow Creek was that it was a [size=4x]"9"[/size]

[Patrick_Mucci]

Paul Payne,

The 4th green at Sand Hills is not without its detractors.

It's one of the few highly constructed features on the golf course.

It's creation and construction caused a good deal of internal debate amongst those invovled.

[Joe Hancock]

some excellent points Patrick

I think Cascata is at least a Doak 6

A breathtaking site in the Nevada mountains - $10,000,000

An unlimited budget to create a majestic, magical golf wonderland - $50,000,000

A Doak Scale 6 - Priceless

Mike,

Facetious, or do you know for a fact that the land and costs to develop just the golf course add up to 60 million?

Joe

[Paul Payne]

Pat,

I thought they may have missed something in the debate.

[Matt_Ward]

It's been some time since I contributed -- hard to do that when you're deeply involved with other pursuits.

I've played Cascata -- as opposed to those clowns who weigh in ONLY from what they THINK from the photos already posted. For those guys who think deep left field seat analysis works -- trust me guys it doesn't.

Here's a few personal thoughts ...

Plenty of $$$ had to be spent in order to handle the harsh terrain. The waterfall through the clubhouse area is a unique aspect and one I've never seen before.

The layout plays mostly one dimensional -- up the slope of the mountain and down the other. I know that's fairly shallow in terms of overall details but it's essentially accurate. I really liked the uphill 2nd -- the long par-4 if memory serves, but the details you find with other area desert courses -- see Boulder Creek (a public layout right down the street) is equally good and frankly will cost you far less than $500. In fact, if you want to find some interesting and at times quirky golf head to Wolf Creek in Mesquite or the affordable and quality options in and around the St. George, UT area.

The issue with Rees Jones here is again the same dilemma. He takes a formulaic style and simply reimposes it. To be totally fair Pat is quite right about the so-called "classic" type architects (and their modern day equivalents and groupies who fawn over each one of them) that far too often originality and uniqueness is lacking in their efforts as well. Unfortunately, because too much of GCA has been reduced to a propaganda mill for the "favored few" it's easy to fall back on the tired punch line of "let's play volleyball again with whatever Rees designs." Nuff said.

Joel is 100% on target -- the aspect that made me enjoy Cascata lies less with the golf than the spectacular off-course sites you see for most of the round. The desert and distant mountains really make for a powerful vista. It's really cool when the sun sets and you see the flickering lights of cars as they make their way from Searchlight, NV and head up U.S. Highway 95 towards Vegas.

The wind pattern is also quite fierce at times. Yes, these elements are part of the discussion but the essential qualities of the design are fairly ho-hum given the sheer number of other courses I've played in my lifetime and in direct comparison to other desert area courses throughout the SW portion of the USA.

Cascata does require steady play but Mike Nuzzo raises a fair point -- the greens are merely end points with really little in terms of detail -- in terms of angles or shapes -- that would cause one to really pause when hitting approaches. Look at the details Baxter Spann provides at Black Mesa, as just one example, and my point is reinforced many times over.

Candidly, when I see a boilerplate "par-72 / 7,300+ yard type course I have to wonder how it will DIFFERENTIATE itself from previous contributions. Cascata doesn't differentiate itself - it simple adds another monstrous effort by man akin to the same breath and scale of the next mega hotel found on the Strip.

The issue boils down to the fact that Cascata is perfect for the Vegas landscape -- plenty of hype with all the attendant buzz for the person who plays golf but not much more -- but for me with my pragmatic sense of golf course quality I would not leave my area of the country in a moment's notice to play it again. To be fair -- I'd say the same about Shadow Creek and Rio Seco, as well, along with a few others. There are quality golf options in and around the Vegas area (try TF's desert layout at Primm or even the Wolf at Paiute *minus the silly island par-3 hole on the back nine there), but let me strongly point out for those whose noses reside high upon the "classic" clouds -- my best advice is simple -- keep you narrow definition of quality golf to yourself and only play what the propaganda mill on this site demands.

Much of desert golf is like Thai food -- if you want your basic salad, steak and potato go elsewhere. It does require a bit more flexibility and given the robot like understanding of what a number of people have on this site it may not be one's cup of tea.

Cascata is entertaining at times and I salute the efforts of those who sought to build a layout on some of the most challenging terrain imagineable. For those who like desert golf there are other options. For those who don't it's simple -- stay home and tout other courses.

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Matt,
We really do miss your contributions around here, and I wish you well in all of your pursuits in the world of golf. Your points are articulate and well-experienced; well-seasoned; and I hope you can appreciate when I say this: replace the name, Cascata with Shadow Creek and the reviews aren't much different are they? Yes, completely different courses. Nothing at all alike, but the reviews are close to the same.

At least for me.

Hope all is well.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Matt Ward,

Congratulations on your electoral victory !

Now that the campaign is over, perhaps you'll be back to being a regular.

[Gib_Papazian]

The Redhead lived in Boulder City while a Prof at UNLV, so I spent quite a bit of time there.

The site is horrible. Minus zero. A rocky mess on the side of hill that offers breathless views of Dry Lake, but nothing else. I cannot understand why the investors thought it was a good idea to try and jam a golf course onto putrid land when money and alternative sites were unlimited.

If you are going to build 40 minutes from the Strip, make it worthwhile.

Yes, it looks like every single other Rees Jones golf course I've seen, except with a desert motif and no natural features incorporated that I could see.

However, I am not going to sit here and piss in the Cheerios of anybody who likes his "look," some people criticize Raynor's stuff for the same reason. (see: Tom Paul Big Tent Theory)

The problem to me is the routing. It stinks. Up the hill through the mini-canyon and then back down the hill. I can think of four holes where I had the sense we were proceeding diagonally - or even across - the texture of the land forms.

Otherwise it was up and down and up and down and up and down to the same Rees-esque targets.

If you are going to spend a jillion dollars to lure your casino guests (read: pigeons ) clear out to Boulder City - and charge 500 quatloos to play it - you better make it like Shadow Creek and knock their dick into their watch-pocket.

So many of the holes could have been routed across the grain and down or up - just for the sake of variety. Maybe a blind shot or a diagonal carry . . . . something, anything but another generic, boilerplate rip-job on the land and the poor idiots who coughed up the scratch to get blown sideways and buy $125 shirts in the pro shop to commemorate being hosed in the posterior.

I've stated it before, right next door at Boulder Creek GC are 27 terrific holes (especially the original 18) for 18% of the price.

If you want kooky desert golf that at least provides some entertainment, Lake Las Vegas is 10 minutes closer to the Strip. There is a good (for Vegas) Nicklaus Course I enjoyed on a decent piece of land.

If you want to strap into a roller coaster and see a completely different approach to the same challenge - on far more severe land than Cascata - the Weiskopf course at Lake Las Vegas is so nutty, I actually like it.

But then again, the same can said for Prestwick.

[Adam Clayman]

Paul Payne,

The 4th green at Sand Hills is not without its detractors.

It's one of the few highly constructed features on the golf course.

It's creation and construction caused a good deal of internal debate amongst those invovled.

Patrick, Could you illuminate the nature of the debate and how do you quantify "a good deal of"?

[Mike_Cirba]

Joe,

I have no idea if it cost $60 million, 50 million, or 10 million.

I was just pointing out that this was supposed to be the course to compete with Shadow Creek, only up in the foothills rather than the desert floor.  

I'm sure the budget was generous.  

The fact that it's just another version of the typical Rees Jones course superimposed on the land is what I'm criticizing.  

Here's the bottom line.   Rees's career spans back nearly 40 years.   If you visit his website you can see the multitudes of courses he designed, oftimes for deep-pocketed owners on highly-sought after sites, who I'm sure put out a heckuva lot of money for the Open Doctor.

It would be reasonable to think that out of all those efforts, many of which are very fine Doak Scale 4's, 5's, 6's, you'd get a lot of 7's, 8's, and even a 9 or two.

How many Rees Jones courses would rate a Doak Scale 7 or above?

I'll start by nominating my favorite, Olde Kinderhook, which is about a 7.5, maybe even an 8.

The next best course of his I've played is Huntsville, which is about a 6.5, on tremendous land where at least a 7 should have been attained.

Others??


Matt Ward,

Great to see you back and I think you know my criticisms of Rees are not knee-jerk or ill-considered, or based on limited experience on his courses.  

I've played a bunch.

Hope to see you around a bit more often.  

[Joe Hancock]

Joe,

I have no idea if it cost $60 million, 50 million, or 10 million.

I was just pointing out that this was supposed to be the course to compete with Shadow Creek, only up in the foothills rather than the desert floor.  

I'm sure the budget was generous.  

The fact that it's just another version of the typical Rees Jones course superimposed on the land is what I'm criticizing.  

Here's the bottom line.   Rees's career spans back nearly 40 years.   If you visit his website you can see the multitudes of courses he designed, oftimes for deep-pocketed owners on highly-sought after sites, who I'm sure put out a heckuva lot of money for the Open Doctor.

It would be reasonable to think that out of all those efforts, many of which are very fine Doak Scale 4's, 5's, 6's, you'd get a lot of 7's, 8's, and even a 9 or two.

How many Rees Jones courses would rate a Doak Scale 7 or above?

I'll start by nominating my favorite, Olde Kinderhook, which is about a 7.5, maybe even an 8.

The next best course of his I've played is Huntsville, which is about a 6.5, on tremendous land where at least a 7 should have been attained.

Others??


Matt Ward,

Great to see you back and I think you know my criticisms of Rees are not knee-jerk or ill-considered, or based on limited experience on his courses.  

I've played a bunch.

Hope to see you around a bit more often.  

Mike,

Even though this post was much longer than your previous one, it was much clearer on what your thoughts and opinions are. By stating figures that are erroneous and perhaps irrelevant did nothing to support your ultimate point. Thanks for clearly stating what you do know.

 

Joe

[Matt_Ward]

A few quick retorts ...

Tommy N:

I agree with you in regards to the Cascata / Shadow Creek dynamic. I've never bought into the fact that Shadow Creek is some sort of architectural achievement -- it's a fantastic engineering marvel but TF has done better work and I can name a few of his layouts that have always gotten little attention -- here and elsewhere.

Desert golf for many people will not pan out. So be it. That doesn't mean it can't / does offer something of quality when the land and hand of a gifted architect is available.

Like I said before -- desert golf is like Thai food. For the steak and apple pie preference set -- the exotic taste will leave you scratching you head.

Cascata does offer aspects that I mentioned - it is no where near the top of what Rees Jones has designed and is easy fodder for his critics to say, "I told you so."

Gib:

You are 1000000% right on target - re: Boulder Creek. The original 18 is well worth playing and very much within the means of neraly all players to afford. I've played the layout twice and feel it's one of the best bargains you can play throughout Clark County.

Mike C:

Never said your comments were "knee-jerked." What I did say is that I know I've played Cascata and I take offense to when people make broad sweeping comments from photos alone and then slap a tag and say, "look what Rees did here."

Cascata fails to provide any real differentiation from a host of Rees Jones courses I have played. I can salute the engineering dynamics and still find major fault with the overall design. You're 1000% on target with Olde Kinderhook. I think it's one of Rees 2-3 best and has the wherewithal to be rated among the top 10 in The Empire State and I am more than prepared to back that up with anyone so inclined to debate.

Pat M:

Thanks -- it's good to have a bit more time to share some thoughts on the site.

[Kalen Braley]

Just my two cents..

Of all the desert courses I've seen, if there was a category for "desert oasis", this one would win outright.  And I mean this in a completely complimentary way. Between the views, trees, creeks, lush conditions, etc, if I was ever lost in the desert and came up on oasis that was a golf course, this would be what I would envision.

I cannot speak to playability as I've never played it, so I won't even pretend to make comments on that.  As someone who loves and seeks out Thai food on a regular basis I do understand what Matt is referring to with his analogy.  This course does seem to have exotic properties to it as well.  However I may be slightly biased living in Utah where I've played my fair share of desert/mountain courses and I've like them.

Perhaps a GCA.com event is in order?  

[Tommy Williamsen]

Joe,

I have no idea if it cost $60 million, 50 million, or 10 million.

I was just pointing out that this was supposed to be the course to compete with Shadow Creek, only up in the foothills rather than the desert floor.  

I'm sure the budget was generous.  

The fact that it's just another version of the typical Rees Jones course superimposed on the land is what I'm criticizing.  

Here's the bottom line.   Rees's career spans back nearly 40 years.   If you visit his website you can see the multitudes of courses he designed, oftimes for deep-pocketed owners on highly-sought after sites, who I'm sure put out a heckuva lot of money for the Open Doctor.

It would be reasonable to think that out of all those efforts, many of which are very fine Doak Scale 4's, 5's, 6's, you'd get a lot of 7's, 8's, and even a 9 or two.

How many Rees Jones courses would rate a Doak Scale 7 or above?

I'll start by nominating my favorite, Olde Kinderhook, which is about a 7.5, maybe even an 8.

The next best course of his I've played is Huntsville, which is about a 6.5, on tremendous land where at least a 7 should have been attained.

Mike, I think you make a good point.  Rees' courses I have played I come away thinking, "It is almost excellent but needs some tweaking. The ifrst course of his I played was Atlantic.  On the same trip I played NGLA, Shinny, and Maidstone.  So it was in pretty fast company.  The look was stunning and it had some verey good holes but needed something.  I also liked Huntsville when I played it right after it opened.  

I wonder if Rees isn't like Art Hillss.  They do some of their best stuff redesign and tinkering with courses someone elses courses.  Some of the stuff that Art Hills did in DC is excellent.  

I wonder what Rees would do if he were given a contract to do some work on courses he built a decade ago.

[John Kirk]

At the risk of being a clown, let me make a comment based solely on these photos.

One of the shortcomings of this course, based on photos only, is the lack of anything exceptional, unusual or quirky.  After I've finished a round, my mind often returns to the joy of playing something really different.

I'm sure Cascata is strategic, beautifully maintained, yields some interesting shots, and scenic.  But I don't see any wild or daring architecture there, and for $500, I want to see something truly memorable.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Adam Clayman,

Let's just say that that feature triggered discussions/debates between DY and C&C.

[Steve Hyden]

Does looking at these pics get you fired up to play the course?  Not me.

[Michael Dugger]

Not for 5 bills  

[Ulrich Mayring]

Not if they pay me, sorry. It's a crime to humanity to build courses like this. Golf should use its economical clout to protect nature wherever possible, not to destroy it.

Apart from the ecological angle, I think this course is about as beautiful as a Barbie Doll, i. e. blatantly artificial. Desert golf, if it wanted to be called golf, would have to be sand greens and rock fairways - which does not make for a very good game and therefore the desert should be left well alone. This course has nothing to do with the spirit of the game and I don't care how the holes play.

Tiger Woods 2008 on the PlayStation has interesting holes and is fun to play, but it is not golf, just entertainment. Sorry to be so harsh, but I hope I am entitled to a personal opinion

Ulrich

[Ryan Farrow]

Ulrich, you summed it up beautifully.

[Jim Nugent]

Not if they pay me, sorry. It's a crime to humanity to build courses like this. Golf should use its economical clout to protect nature wherever possible, not to destroy it.

Apart from the ecological angle, I think this course is about as beautiful as a Barbie Doll, i. e. blatantly artificial. Desert golf, if it wanted to be called golf, would have to be sand greens and rock fairways - which does not make for a very good game and therefore the desert should be left well alone. This course has nothing to do with the spirit of the game and I don't care how the holes play.

Should Pine Valley have never been built then?  

[Ulrich Mayring]

Not sure where you're getting at with Pine Valley. Viewing the old photos that are available it looks like a spectacularly rough course on a rough and sandy site. Kind of like a Sunningdale with trees. It absolutely belongs there. Maybe they over-manicure it today or what do you mean?

Or were you talking about ecological implications? Well, I wouldn't accuse a man of not being ahead of his time, so George Crump and the other old guys get a free pass here

Ulrich

[Jim Nugent]

I thought Crump built Pine Valley's grass fairways and greens on pure sand.  Read here on GCA.com that he spent a great deal of time and money figuring out how to make the turf grow in the sandy wasteland there.

By what you said about Cascata, shouldn't he have left the greens and fairways as sand?  

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()