[Tom Huckaby]

I want shivas to clarify this:

But to be clear, I didn't say it was better than Sand Hills.  I said that given the snap, next-day choice to play RC, SH, CPC, NGLA or PV, I'd point the plane toward Butte.

So this means all of your gushing over Rock Creek was more about the fly fishing and great steaks than the golf?

My plane still goes to Mullen, with a damn sure detour to Holyoke.  But of course I have never been to Rock Creek.

TH

[John Kirk]

I would agree with Matt that the par-3 holes and the par-5 holes are not as good as the par-4's, but that's true of more than one great course.  (Ballybunion for one.)

I'm not sure I agree about the par 5s, which I liked quite a bit.  When I get a chance, I will begin a thread on hole #18, where I will make my case that it is a fine finishing hole.

Rock Creek is lovely, the kind of place you miss when you're home.

[Tom Huckaby]

I did clarify, Tom.  I said there's a difference between subjective greatness and objective greatness, and that I was expressing the latter not the former because the former is beyond my unilateral ability to determine. 

Or did you just skip that part... 

OK then.

So your personal favorite is Rock Creek, but you think that by some other standard other courses may be superior.

I can live with that.

It just really cheapens the question, however.  If we look at it this way, my plane goes to LA so I can play with my Dad.

TH

[Daryl David]

Well, that means we cover the field because I really like #10!   I believe Tom Doak mentioned that it was one of the first holes he "discovered" on the site.

[John Kirk]

#3 is excellent.  Great second shot options.  After a good drive, take a shot at reaching the green through the right slot.  An imperfect drive yields an excellent second shot decision, based on the center bunkers.  The high plateau left gives a nice look at back and right pins, while the right slot layup gives a flat approach to the left pins.  Or carry the bunkers and takle your chances with a 50-70 yard pitch, which in my opinion, are the hardest shots on this course.  Really nice.

[DMoriarty]

Tom Huckaby,

I find your contributions a bit strange on this thread.  You usually really like almost every course you see, yet you have no trouble knocking Shivas and others who are raving about this course, even though you have never seen it.   

How can you be so sure that Sand Hills is far and away better that RCCC if you have not even seen RCCC?

_____________________________________________

John K,

I look forward to your comments on the 18th.  I too liked the hole and am surprised by some of the comments.   My appreciation for both the 3rd and 18th have grown each time I have played them.   While 18 is simpler and more elegant (borrowing a term from Matt D., who I think it borrowed it from Eric Iverson) than the moraine holes, anyone who did not find it an exciting, challenging, and strategic finish must have played the course under much softer conditions than those at the Renaissance Cup.

[Tom Huckaby]

Tom Huckaby,

I find your contributions a bit strange on this thread.  You usually really like almost every course you see, yet you have no trouble knocking Shivas and others who are raving about this course, even though you have never seen it.   

How can you be so sure that Sand Hills is far and away better that RCCC if you have not even seen RCCC?

_____________________________________________

John K,

I look forward to your comments on the 18th.  I too liked the hole and am surprised by some of the comments.   My appreciation for both the 3rd and 18th have grown each time I have played them.   While 18 is simpler and more elegant (borrowing a term from Matt D., who I think it borrowed it from Eric Iverson) than the moraine holes, anyone who did not find it an exciting, challenging, and strategic finish must have played the course under much softer conditions than those at the Renaissance Cup.

Dave:

As I've said, I have no issues with anyone praising Rock Creek - heck I can see from the pictures that it looks very very great.  Shivas just made a statement that was so HUGELY praising it - preferring it to all of those other courses he listed - that well.... I just wanted some clarification.  It's not that I don't believe it, I just wanted further explanation.  Ajnd I don't think I "knocked" anyone praising this course...  I certainly didn't mean to.  My comments were directed solely to shivas, and it was in the spirit of shit-giving that he and I do quite a lot.

Thus to make it clear, I am absolutely NOT sure Sand Hills is superior.  Indeed, how can I know?  Shivas and I just tend to have very similar tastes in golf courses and golf in general, so when he said RC was the one he'd want to go to - even above SH and all those others - that kinda got my head spinning.  I found it hard to believe.  But that doesn't mean I don't think it's possible.

Hopefully that makes sense.

TH

[Matt_Ward]

David M, John K, et al:

If you compare the 18th at Rock Creek and the 18th at Sebonack the latter wins hands down. I don't see the 18th at Rock Creek as a fatal flaw but I don't see it having anywhere near the same unique challenges found with other holes at the course. If the 10th were the finishing hole at Rock Creek that would be a completely different story.

The 18th at Rock Creek is a good way to get one stroke back and you can't beat the background scenery with the Flint Range in the background. I just don't see what else the hole provides that is at the same level as so many other holes at the course.

[DMoriarty]

Tom,

My point is simply that I don't see any reason or justification for your incredulity at Shivas' comment.   I've played RCCC a number of times and I can see where Shivas is coming from.   In other words, while my plane would probably point toward NGLA (it would likely be shot down if it got too close to Pine Valley) I don't find Shivas' preference for RCCC over the others to be outrageous or over the top.   I certainly wouldn't write off or dismiss his opinion as irrational exuberance resulting from him being one of the first to see something new. 

You predicted that he will be singing a different tune in a year or two.  If you ever actually play the course, I think it much more likely that you will be singing a different tune.  Not that you will necessarily agree with Shivas-- I doubt your pride would ever let that happen.   But at the very least you will see the merit in his position, and not dismiss it as over-the-top or pure hyperbole.

__________________________________________________________


Matt, is there some requirement that the best par 5 has to be the last?   Or that it ought to be largely birdie proof?

My sense was that any second shot anywhere away from the creek would leave a very difficult third, even at short range.  Granted, the visual cues are not there like on much of the course, but the need for thoughtful execution very much is.   Could it be, with the ease and room one has to blast a long second shot, that you overlooked the demands the tilted green places on the approach and even the chips and pitches? 

[Tom Huckaby]

Tom,

My point is simply that I don't see any reason or justification for your incredulity at Shivas' comment.   I've played RCCC a number of times and I can see where Shivas is coming from.   In other words, while my plane would probably point toward NGLA (it would likely be shot down if it got too close to Pine Valley) I don't find Shivas' preference for RCCC over the others to be outrageous or over the top.   I certainly wouldn't write off or dismiss his opinion as irrational exuberance resulting from him being one of the first to see something new. 

You predicted that he will be singing a different tune in a year or two.  If you ever actually play the course, I think it much more likely that you will be singing a different tune.  Not that you will necessarily agree with Shivas-- I doubt your pride would ever let that happen.   But at the very least you will see the merit in his position, and not dismiss it as over-the-top or pure hyperbole.

Dave:

You are likely very correct.  Perhaps not about the pride part; hell I have little of that and change my opinions all the time, admit I was wrong quite often - but about all the rest for sure.  Just remember what I said - it was mainly just me giving shivas shit.

I apologize if it detracted from this discussion.

Just do note one other thing, though:  Doak himself also called shivas crazy.   

TH

[DMoriarty]

Well Shivas is crazy.  We all know that.   

Whatever TomD said about Shivas, I got the impression last week that he is quite pleased with the course, as well he should be.  All involved deserve congratulations, especially Eric Iverson and the rest of Doak's crew, Matt Dunmire and his crew, and Bill Foley and all those at RCCC. 

My only issue with Shivas' position is that he stated it in such strong terms that it has the potential to create an adversarial backlash among those who have not even seen the course, even if they are just "giving him shit" or think him crazy.   

In other words, if one has already decided and/or argued that there is no way that this course will be as good as Sand Hills before even playing it, I think this cannot help but influence their opinion when they actually do.  This course is good enough that people ought to try to play it with as few preconceived expectations, opinions, or biases as possible.

But I don't blame Shivas for taking such a strong position.   We talked while he was still in Deer Lodge, and he was very excited about the place; more excited than I have seen or heard him about any place, and I was with him when he first played Cypress Point and was around here for the whole "eat my scorecard" incident at NGLA. 

[Tom Huckaby]

Dave:  duly noted and I am duly scolded.  My error is thinking this is just between me and shivas, and that nothing said on this site matters all that much.

I think you are right to take that issue with shivas' position, though.  Though my talk was meant in jest - and my error remains that I don't take anything said on here all that seriously, especially what I say myself - well... others might indeed create the adversarial backlash you mention.  And they might take my words too seriously.  I shall watch myself about this going forward.

TH

[Matt_Ward]

David:

You missed my point by a wide margin.

I never said the hole has to be "birdie proof."

It's more than just a lacking of "visual cues" -- which to some degree are mitigated by what I mentioned previously with the Flint Range in the background.

Nonetheless ...

The hole is merely filler for me. It clearly adds a good bit of yardage to the card but like I said compare the 18th at Rock Creek and the 18th at Sebonack - both par-5 closers and with Doak's hand involved in both instances -- and it becomes apparent that the Deer Lodge hole is as flat as four-day-old Pepsi. I don't see the hole as a fatal flaw but it's just one that really didn't provide the kind of rush I clearly felt from the others.

In regards to your comment that I "overlooked" some of the finer points -- sure it's possible. It's also possible that I'm more right on this hole than you are prepared to admit as well.

Last point -- at many of the holes at Rock Creek the importance of drive placement is really a top priority item. The 18th at Rock Creek didn't do that for me. Like I said -- nothing fatal but just a bit of a downer given what has preceded it.

Dave, in regards to your last comment to Huck -- I concur that sometimes people viewing comments from others may scratch their head and say how could a course located in Montana be thaaaaat good. I know what I saw when I was there and given my travels and different courses played Rock Creek is indeed a very special place. When you are out on the property and away from all the commotion that daily life can provide the time spent there is indeed a cut or two above so many other first rate layouts.

If there's a real apples to apples debate it would be between Ballyneal and Rock Creek.

[DMoriarty]

Dave:  duly noted and I am duly scolded.  My error is thinking this is just between me and shivas, and that nothing said on this site matters all that much.

I think you are right to take that issue with shivas' position, though.  Though my talk was meant in jest - and my error remains that I don't take anything said on here all that seriously, especially what I say myself - well... others might indeed create the adversarial backlash you mention.  And they might take my words too seriously.  I shall watch myself about this going forward.

TH

Not meaning to scold at all.  Just pointing out that, for once, Shivas might not be entirely off his rocker, and that you and everyone else ought to try and see this place for yourselves if at all possible.    There are some incredible golf holes, some like you have never seen before. 

____________________________________

Matt,

The first time I played the 18th the conditions were less than firm and the hole did not meet my expectations (formed on earlier walk arounds.)    But I gained much appreciation for the hole after playing it last week under much better (and firmer) conditions.  I agree that if the golfer plans on going for the green in three there is not a huge premium on placing the drive beyond hitting the fairway (which is narrower for short hitters.)   But if I were able to try to get home it two, I'd sure want to hug the creek on left, for the angle.

I've never played the 18th at Sebonack, so I cannot compare.   Is the 18th at Sebonack the third best par 5 at Sebonack?    If not, then how does the 18th at RCCC compare to the 3rd best par 5 at Sebonack?   

My point is that, even if it is not world class, this golf hole is very solid; too solid to be dismissed as "filler"or compared as equal to the let-down one feels at the 18th at CPC.    Not every hole can be world class, not even on a world class course.   This is especially true when one approaches golf design from a perspective of making the most of what the site gives you.   

Is your main objection to the hole is that it is the 18th?   Would you find it less objectionable if it was somewhere else in the routing?   This I would understand more, I guess, but might not agree.

As for Ballyneal vs. Rock Creek, I don't want to touch that one.   I saw Ballyneal very early when conditions were not quite there, but still I thought it compared favorably to Sand Hills.   I imagine Ballyneal is quite a bit more fun now that it was then.   

But for what its worth . . . the site at Ballyneal reaks of golf and is only an ocean away from a near perfect setting.  In contrast, while the RCCC course fits perfectly in the rugged terrain now, I think there may have been much greater  challenges to overcome at RCCC than at Ballyneal. That the comparison is even suggested is a remarkable compliment to RCCC.

[Tom Huckaby]

Dave:

Understood.  But if you know me at all, you know that it's not for lack of DESIRE that I doubt I'll ever see Rock Creek.  Good lord in a perfect world I'd be there tomorrow.  Sadly my life is not perfect.   But hopefully more will see it so we won't HAVE to rely on the word of nutjobs like shivas.

As for Ballyneal, it played firm and very fast this weekend.  Fun was the operative word, oh yes it was.

TH

[Mike_Cirba]

Huck,

I didn't know you'd played Ballyneal.

And you say your life isn't perfect?!?     

Would you care to offer a compare and contrast with Sand Hills??

Thanks for taking it under advisement. 

[Tom Huckaby]

Huck,

I didn't know you'd played Ballyneal.

And you say your life isn't perfect?!?     

Would you care to offer a compare and contrast with Sand Hills??

Thanks for taking it under advisement. 

Mike:

My life is perfect at times.  That is, at times I am very lucky.  The past week has been one of those times.  But let's just say weeks like this are hard-earned.   

As for the rest, greater men than I have punted on that one.  The feelings here run quite deep.

TH

[Matt_Ward]

David:

I view 18th holes as the summary statement to the round that's set to conclude. If the 18th is merely filler -- and I see the 18th at Rock as that -- because if the player opts to play it as three-shot hole there's really not much there to contest that particular play. The fairway is more than wide enough to accomodate even a decent miss and the second shot is simply a matter-of-fact lay-up. No doubt the pitch shot can be problematic but it's not anything from a unique perspective.

I don't expect all 18 holes at stellar courses to be all-world / all-universe, etc, etc. However, I do expect the closing hole to be a concluding statement that ties it all together. That didn't happen for me with that hole.

David, again you missed my point on 18th hole comparisons / re: Rock Creek v Sebonack. I see what Doak / Nicklaus did there as a fine concluding hole. Thanks to the input of owner Michael P the finale really brings the player home in grand fashion and there is sufficient risk and reward on all shots when you play the LI hole. The average player is also challenged -- albeit in a manner that is not too overwhelming.

I don't doubt the architect must take the site as he finds it. The decision to use a par-5 at Rock Creek as a closer was something determined in the pre-routing decision-making. The only thing I can conclude was that the hole was meant to provide one last shot at getting back a shot and I think that's fine -- I just don't see the design details to enhance that desire. When you've been samply various flavors of delicious icea cream all day and then you get predictable vanilla at the end it makes you wonder if something was left out.

Like I said before -- if the 10th at Rock Creek were the closer -- the net result would have been far different. That hole offers any number of unique options starting from the tee and going through the entire hole.

I really enjoyed Rock Creek so roasting me over the coals because I don't see it as bullerproof is pointless. Like you, I favor Ballyneal over Rock Creek - with no disrespect to the MT layout because as I have said previosuly, the sum total of the par-4 holes there are among the best I have ever played from the Doak layouts I have been able to play to date.. I just think the land, routing and sheer diversity of holes at the Holyoke facility are a tad better.

[DMoriarty]

Matt, I am not raking you over the coals any more than you are raking me over them.  I thought this was a discussion.   

We disagree on what an 18th hole must be.  We also disagree on the second shot on the 18th; if the golfer treats it as "a matter of fact layup" that golfer may get a rude awakening on the next shot.

Other than that, the back to back par threes, and the par 3 12th, I think we see the course quite similarly.   Speaking of which, what are your top 5 modern holes under 150 yards?   

[Tom_Doak]

Matt:

I have no problem with you rating any of my courses among the top 50-75 in the world and you are getting no complaints from me about your overall grade.

We don't agree on the importance of the finishing hole in that overall grade, but that's just a difference of taste and emphasis.

I did not choose the 18th hole at Rock Creek as it is, in order to "provide one last shot at getting back a shot".  It was just the best use of the terrain I had left.  The 16th and 17th holes were in place, and you seem to agree with those decisions ... that puts the 18th tee where it is, and the 18th green somewhere back up near the lodge, so it's a par five.  And the terrain did not afford enough visibility to make the hole sexier as you seem to wish it were ... I agree it's not sexy but I don't care about that as much as you do, either.

Certainly, it's not in the premier spot on the property like #10, but I think the real reason so many people have found it a downer conclusion is because it's much harder than it looks.  It's too easy to pull the second shot into the creek, to pull the approach shot to the left of the green, or to three-putt for a six on a tough green.  And let's face it, nobody likes to finish with a six.

[Matt_Ward]

David:

Mea culpa on my part.

Our agreement w Rock Creek is far stronger than the isolated areas where we see things a bit differently.

I do stand by what I set concerning 18th holes -- they should be, in my mind at least, summary statements of what you encountered that day. That doesn't mean to say the concluding hole should be a bear and focus just on outright difficulty. But the 18th at Rock Creek is vanilla and it becomes more noticeable given the high quality number of holes that you encounter before getting there. I was hoping for a Sinatra like closing and instead of Frank I got Nancy instead.

Tom:

Clearly, to be fair, I would need to see Rock Creek again to get a much deeper analysis of what I first saw when I was there both on the high points and those I thought lesser of. You can help me, and likely others, in your words what you see as the role of an 18th hole? Clearly, you and Nicklaus bowed to the wishes of Michael P at Sebonack and the result there was quite refreshing and as I have stated a superb summary statement hole to the day at Sebonack.

Tom, just a quick question -- when you get into a routing might it be possible that something had to give after having the 16th and 17th holes already in place? No doubt any routing will involve compromises -- the difference between having a grander hole in one area of the routing and others possibly being less so. Trade-offs have happened at other superior courses and Rock Creek is no less different than others in that regard.

Tom, you say the 18th is "much harder than it looks." How so? From a birdie perspective? That might be true but from simply desiring to make a conventional par I don't see it that way at all.

I hear what you say about the possibility of people pulling shots and landing in the creek or three-jacking the final hole but I think you also need to see the reverse side. The drive area is really no where near as challenging and though provoking as it might have been. Please don't misunderstand me to say that such a drive would need a plethora of bunkers or other man-added contraptions that would not work naturally. The second shot is also rather benign to the point of being ho-hum. For someone to pull the shot into the creek when all that land mass is out there to the right is something I find hard to believe. No doubt any person who tries to steer the extra long shot with the hope in getting there in two blows may do such a thing. No doubt any pitch to a green with plenty of unique contours can offer a number of items for players to think carefully about. Like I said previously, it's not a fatal situation for my overall assessment of the course, but I was hoping for a bit more. 

[Matt_Ward]

Just a final thought on Rock Creek - it's so refreshing to see such a top quality layout in the mountain time zone -- the last real frontier here in the USA within the continental area of America.

The ride to the property sets the tone for the day and when you finally see the site that was chosen one needs to give high marks to Doak and his talented team for selecting a site that encapsulates so much within the totality of the 18 holes played.

There's been discussion - from me and others -- on a few aspects of the course but the sum total speaks volumes and with time and exposure it's likely Rock Creek will be one of those "must plays" when traveling to the Big Sky State of Montana.

[Matt_Ward]

Dave:

You are so right to highlight Rock Creek -- how any pub can be without it for a top 100 position is simply amazing.

[Sean Leary]

Matt,

We heard you loud and clear on the other thread.

RCCC will be a fixture on all of the lists once enough raters play it. No one is saying that it doesn't belong.

Let it go, partner.

[Jud_T]

Matt,

One question...1 course to play every day for the rest of your life- RCCC or Kingsley?

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()