[Paul Payne]

I finally may have a chance to swing out there and play Rustic Canyon next week so I was taking a look a their website in preparation. Among the upgrades they have listed for 2008 are lengthening the course and upgrading the bunkers with softer sand and manicured side walls.

I kind of like the way the bunkers look in the photos. Is this seriously an improvement to the course or are they pandering to the golfing public? Since I have never played there yet I can't say but are they hurting for traffic because the course does not look like a highly groomed resort course?

[ed_getka]

I would imagine they are trying to reduce maintenance costs, but that is just a guess.
   The course does a decent number of rounds I believe.
When they start talking about softening the contours of the green, then we'll know the apocalypse is near.

[John Kavanaugh]

Popularity as an excuse for poor design....Only at Rustic.

[Ryan Farrow]

John, seriously. Your bitching about this course is really pathetic.


Try this:


Popularity as the result of a fun golf course. Yea, pretty much only at Rustic.

[John Kavanaugh]

Sounds like the same changes that were made at Riviera.  Who did the bitching then?

[David Stamm]

A note to all. Alot of the vegetation in the wash from behind the 4 green and along the fifth all the way to where you have to cross to get to the green has been removed. In fact, where the wash breaks up the 5th hole it is virtually all gone. New sand in some of the bunkers is actually needed in certain places, so that's really not a bad thing.

[W.H. Cosgrove]

Is management trying to solve a speed of play issue?

[rjsimper]

Is management trying to solve a speed of play issue?

By lengthening the golf course?

[R_Paulis]

First off this morning at Rustic after not playing there for about 6 months. Immediately noticed new sand in many bunkers even in the less defined bunkers such as the the one crossing in front of #1 green. It was needed.

The crossing wash in fairwary #4 was being cleared and some shaping is occuring. There appeared to be some mounding between #3 and #5 fairways but it's not in play. The biggest change I noticed was the wide, straight, cleared wash starting between #5 and #6 holes. It was not quite a runway, but this wash could clearly be seen from #6 tee. It was almost shocking for this does not fit in with Rustic's rustic style but it's not in play and I'd expect the undergrowth will conceal Rustic's new runway in short order. I have designated it as Runway 5 Left.

RC still a great course at a great value. Albeit a bit overwatered this morning to counter the intense heat which reached the mid 80's at 10am when finishing the round.

[Paul Payne]

I guess that is what I was a bit curious about in a nutshell. I can see why any course eventually caves on the length issue. Even if not neccessary for a challenging round there is a point where some golfers won't even consider a course if the tips don't meet there length srandard. (even if they don't play from the tips)

I just didn't get the manicured bunker thing. From everything I have heard or read and the photos I have seen it sort of goes against the look that they have created there.

I've seen it debated here before but is it really that much cheaper from a maintenance standpoint? I can see a pace of play issue if players cannot locate their ball in heavy fringe or idly ponder how to extract the ball.

Still seems a bit cheezy in the end. Like a woman wearing the wrong shade of makeup or something.

[R_Paulis]

I guess that is what I was a bit curious about in a nutshell. I can see why any course eventually caves on the length issue. Even if not neccessary for a challenging round there is a point where some golfers won't even consider a course if the tips don't meet there length srandard. (even if they don't play from the tips)

I just didn't get the manicured bunker thing. From everything I have heard or read and the photos I have seen it sort of goes against the look that they have created there.

I've seen it debated here before but is it really that much cheaper from a maintenance standpoint? I can see a pace of play issue if players cannot locate their ball in heavy fringe or idly ponder how to extract the ball.

Still seems a bit cheezy in the end. Like a woman wearing the wrong shade of makeup or something.

Paul - The "enhancements" at RC are minor. The bunkers remain unmanicured except for the addition of sand in a few locations. For example, I spent a lot of time viewing #13 par 5 with approximately 6 bunkers and noticed a bit more sand but none of them are any more manicured.

I did not notice any attempt at lengthening the course. I struggle where additional length would be obtained though... Most of the shorter holes lack space for additional tee boxes. I can think of a few holes where some yardage may be obtained with an extra set of tee boxes but they are the tougher and longer holes already and making these holes tougher may cause Rustic to be a bit unbalanced.

[Lynn_Shackelford]

Lengthening the course?  Its on their website?  Paul, the first thing you need to learn is not believe anything on any golf course's website, especially theirs.
I walked my dog up there last night and the course was very dry and firm from the heat.  They over water in the mornings, but it dries out quickly.
Good for more more sand, but still way too many rocks.
The course isn't doing the work on 4,5 and 6.  It is the flood control district.  They should have it ready for those heavy July rains.

[David Kelly]

>>>>Cart paths will be renovated with some current dirt areas being paved.

Always a priority of course.

Rustic Canyon definitely doesn't need distance as it plays a lot longer than it did when it first opened due to fairway turf conditions.  From observation I would say that probably 90% of players do not play the back tees so once again a course is spending money in an attempt to cater to at most 10% of their clientele.  And its not even that many because of the 10% who play the tips I think most of them would say (or their scores would indicate) that the course is plenty long enough.

[Adam Clayman]

Sounds like the same changes that were made at Riviera. 

Were does it say they are building features that go against the flow of the property?

The early word was to play RC before the owner got his drutha's, anyway.

I wonder what kind of trees they will plant?

[David Kelly]

I wonder what kind of trees they will plant?

Oh there have been plantings.  But so far nothing anywhere around the playing corridors.  Mainly they are along the road on the left of #1, behind the tee box on #6 and behind the tee box on #18.

[W.H. Cosgrove]

Is management trying to solve a speed of play issue?

By lengthening the golf course?

By creating manicured sidewalls in the bunkers.  With the wind I played in at Rustic, some par 4's could be 600 yards and par 5's could be 250.   What are they lengthening? 

I am trying to get at what they are trying to achieve.  They aren't spending money just to spend money are they?

[rjsimper]

That's the thing - as David pointed out, few play the tips anyway.  Personally, I prefer the tips because I think the course is an appropriate length for my game, but no way do I feel like it NEEDS to be longer...I'm not even sure where they'd add yardage to the course and have it be purposeful. 

It says on the website that they are going from 69xx to 7100 yards. 

[David Kelly]

  They aren't spending money just to spend money are they?

That is one thing they won't do.  They may misallocate the money but they are not just spending to spend.  Otherwise they would have a real maintenance budget.

[W.H. Cosgrove]

  They aren't spending money just to spend money are they?

That is one thing they won't do.  They may misallocate the money but they are not just spending to spend.  Otherwise they would have a real maintenance budget.

So once again, what is their motivation?  Change for change sake or is there a perceived problem?

[David Kelly]

So once again, what is their motivation?  Change for change sake or is there a perceived problem?

You should ask them because their motivation isn't apparent to those of us who play there all the time.

[Matt_Ward]

Just a quick question -- it may have already been answered -- but on what holes is lengthening being contemplated and why ?

Thanks ...

[Matt_Ward]

B U M P

Does anyone have the answer to what I asked previously on the holes being contemplated for additional yardage and the reasons why ?

[Joe Perches]

Does anyone have the answer to what I asked previously on the holes being contemplated for additional yardage and the reasons why ?

I have not played Rustic Canyon in several months.
I have not seen the modifications done to the channel separating 3 and 5.

I believe a restored back tee will one day be put back in play on 14.
It'll replace the tee washed out a couple of years ago and again
make the tee shot carry something to consider for longer hitters.

Other than that, where to extend seems fruitless.

6 could get a bit longer, but who'd want to play a 240y par 3 with a front pin?
9 and 10 could get longer, but rounds would slow down.
Changing 12 would be wrong.  Doable, but still wrong.
Extending 13 would be unpleasant.
18 could be put back a couple dozen yards.

Anyway, I just called the pro shop and asked about possible changes, which are apparently still undecided, and learned that perhaps #2 tee might be moved back and to the right, #9 extended backwards, #10 as well, and maybe even 12.  Nothing said about 18.

[David Stamm]

Extending 12 is just plain dumb if it happened. It's not about the tee shot.


As for 9 and 10, why??


I wouldn't have a huge problem if they did domething with the tee on 2, but again, for what reason? It's a tough hole already.

[David Kelly]

Does anyone have the answer to what I asked previously on the holes being contemplated for additional yardage and the reasons why ?

Anyway, I just called the pro shop and asked about possible changes, which are apparently still undecided, and learned that perhaps #2 tee might be moved back and to the right, #9 extended backwards, #10 as well, and maybe even 12.  Nothing said about 18.

It sounds like their idea is to just add length for the sake of length.  They obviously haven't analyzed the play on those holes.

The 2nd hole is the #1 handicap hole and yields very few birdies, or even legitimate birdie putts. 

Extending the 9th hole would cost some real money as the tee box is built up a lot.  Even if you did build a new tee you can't go very far back because you run into the back to the 7th green.  It would be pointless just to add 10 - 20 yds.

The 10th hole could be extended back as far as they want but because the ground is sloping away from the green it would cost a lot to bring in enough dirt to build up the tee.  As it is now most players have their hands full on the hole as is.

Extending the 12th is just dumb as David Stamm said.

I emphasis the cost because the course has dedicated so little money to maintenance that that aspect of the course perennially suffers.  Look at the rampant poe infestation on the greens.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()