Tim
Well said. I would not assume to say that it's a TRIBUTE COURSE, and in no way did I intend to take anything away from KC. As you pointed out there are many similarities and I do think that Mike's style has no doubt been influenced by CD and other Classical values of architecture. There are some small similarities, the challenge and tilt of the greens. To say Kingsley is a better course is a matter of personal opinion, and yes, I myself can see where you're coming from. I think the biggest similarity is variety, and even more so the day to day variety. I figure out / find something new every time I'm there. It was interesting to me to play a round with Mike, and see him attack his own creation. Particularly, the short par 4 13th, but I'll save that story for when we get there. These courses are playable for everyone, and everyone will play it differently. They don't favor a certain type of player (except for maybe the exceptional putter) and everyone from scratch to high handicap will struggle and vice versa. But each takes mulitple plays for one to feel comfortable and learn particularly you limits. A player is going to make bogeys and doubles and x's but they're going to be intersting bogeys to say the least. I could go on and on and on about the my own victories and stuggles at each course. To sum it up, I think they are perfect compliments to one another,they are easily comparable and similar, yet different in there own right. If someone asked you, what course would you say is truly comparable to CD what would be your response? If someone asked you to direct him to the closest copy of KC where would you send him? Furthermore, to say that KC is a tribute course takes away from the original holes and ideas throughout was not my intention. In fact it was an attempt to pay respect and the highest compliment I could think of using the contrast and compare argument.