Confusion about Medinah

[T_MacWood]

Medinah is rated by GD as the 13th greatest golf course in the land (in between Pinehurst #2 and Seminole). As we speak the course is closed under going a complete redesign/remodeling at the hands of Rees Jones. Is Medinah actually the 13th greatest course in the US and if so why completely redesign it (again)?  

[Joel_Stewart]

Ask the green committee or the board of directors?  Personally I think Medinah has evolved to exist for BIG tournaments instead of serving its members.  Considering it happens every 5 or 10 years it seems crazy.

[Gary_Smith]

Tom MacWood,

"Completely" seems a  bit strong for what may be going on at Medinah.

Just my opinion, could be wrong.  

[Kevin_Keeley]

Maybe the 13th place finish was in celebration of the pre-1999 PGA redesign? Or maybe memories of the redesign before that? Who have the tapped to redo the 17 hole after Rees's version plays to lukewarm reviews?

[Patrick_Mucci_Jr]

Tom MacWood,

I think you've raised a very valid question.
I'd be interested to hear the responses from the raters.

Kevin Keeley,

How do you know, in advance, that the changes will play to lukewarm reviews ?

Have you played Medinah before these changes ?
Have you seen any of the changes ?

If you haven't seen the changes, how can you offer a reliable, intelligent, fact based analysis ?

[George Pazin]

They have 2 other ones for that.  

What's the story with the other two? Who designed them? Any good? Simply tamer versions of the big boy, or different in character?

Separately, is #3 really "the best of a breed"?

[RJ_Daley]

I spent some time touring around the other courses with a superintendent during the 99 PGA.  The ladies course is the only one that remains unrenovated architecturally from Bendelow's design.  Sure, the maintenance staff has tweaked some aspects, but not the underlying design, which is a very nice course for lady members at some 5400 yards.  The greens are pushed-up native soil and smaller, with more demure old style greenside bunkering.

#1, has been substantially remodelled by the likes of Ed Lawrence Packard and Killian and Nuggent, displaying much of their traditionally crafted Chicago school (RBHarris) bunker styles.  I'm sure Jeff Brauer can comment, and may have done some of the work hisownself!    

[Matt_Ward]

Shivas:

There was a question the other day on "Who wants to be a Millionaire" and it went like this ...

Identify the name that has made the most face lifts ...

A). Medinah #3
B). Michael Jackson
C). Liz Taylor

I took a wild stab and said "A." Does that sound correct to you?

There is no way that Medinah belongs that high in the ratings. I don't doubt the course being demanding, but where is the character -- where is the style? It's muscular parksland golf for sure -- I would think Tiger will be sending a thank you note since a number of key events will be played there and how the course dovetails quite nicely for him.

[Matt_Ward]

Shivas (aka the W-i-n-d-y city proponent ) I did very much say the same about ANGC -- especially speaking positively about the well done piece by Brad Klein. I agree with Brad's take that ANGC is overrated and should not be in the top ten.

When you talk about Bethpage Black let's also be clear the fundamental layout is still there. Minus a small change with the 18th green (taking it from a pure circular aspect to one that was pushed in slightly for a right greenside pin placement). All that was really done was improve the inadequate turf conditions.

Let's be clear -- Medinah has issues on what it wants to be --maybe a visit to the shrink would help? I mean how many times has the 17th been altered? First, let's put the green near H20 with the beautiful corrigated wall in front of it -- I think I've seen pictures of some castles that had lesser defenses than that  . Then the club opts to put the green back and after a brief time decided to change it's mind once again. I guess the 3rd version will be near the water or am I missing something -- maybe they can get a fountain with a few fake ducks to lend it some defining purpose. By the way -- doesn't the course have a replication enough times with par-3's that cross Lake Kadijah?

There is really nothing memorable about Medinah -- yes, it is long, it's tough and it has a ton of trees -- I say they should stretch it out next time to just under 8,000 yards and make the boys r-e-a-l-l-y earn it.  However, the object word for the course is B-O-R-I-N-G ... just because you have logistics for holding tournaments does not make you ipso facto a great course worthy of being among the 20 best in America. I'll give you a two-course equivalent in other parts of the country -- Baltusrol / Lower (NJ) and Oakland Hills / South (MI).

Shivas:

You don't argue that Medinah is great by saying well look and see what they did with those other courses. Heck, I don't doubt that's true for some of them (look at some of examples above) but where does that mean that Medinah gets a free ride to be included as #13? Here you have a situation where a facility having served as a major host for a number of years (past and future) gives a course like Medinah a big push to the top. Look, I didn't say the course should not be rated at all -- don't want to start an earthquake with that -- but it's just not among the top 20 courses in America -- a borderline top 50 call at best. OK -- fire away when ready -- you may need to fire a bunker buster to get me ...

[GeoffreyC]

Dave

I don't know Medinah at all and I've just seen it on TV.  I'd like to know what are its best golf holes and what distinguishes them such that the course falls so high on the GD list?

When I think of other brute golf courses that fall in the top of various lists like Winged Foot or Oakmont, I could immediately tell you individual architectural features and holes that distinguish these places from the rest.  Similarly, other courses near it on the list such as Seminole and Prairie Dunes have world class golf holes.

I really don't buy into the argument that a course can be much greater then the sum of its parts.  Where's the Kobe beef at Medinah? (note again that this isn't a criticism as I've not seen the place but like Shadow Creek we really don't hear much about the individual holes but instead the whole experience of playing there).

[ian]

Shivas,

I wouldn't know if you are right or wrong, don't actually care; but I admire the fact that your standing your ground for what you believe.

By the way this is one of seven threads on rankings.

[Paul Richards]

Shivas:

I will hop in here and defend your defense of Medinah #3.

It is a BIG golf course.  Long, tough as nails, and a real brute!  It is an Open-worthy course - make no mistake, that is what it is all about.  

The #1 course is a very good golf course.  Unfortunately, I still haven't played #2 yet -   - but I hear it has a couple of the best holes out there.  Period.  For the everyday member, playing #1 is plenty of golf.  But when you go to visit Medinah, you want to play #3, because it is such a treat.  However, IMHO, I don't think I'd want to play there every day because it is just too hard.  In my book, that is it's biggest downfall.

[ForkaB]

shivas

"facelifto ergo shit" is my nomination for faux-latinate sentence fragment of the year.  It gets to the heart (or at least the bowels...) of all the mindless "if it was 'fixed' it couldnna' ever been broken?" school of architectural analysis which underlies a lot of the posts on this suite.

In this (and other threads) you've told me enough about the architecture of Medina to make it a hidden gem to me.  Those who criticize the place (or any other place, mind you) without ever having been there are just smoking their own exhaust.  IMHO, of course, I could be right..........

[GeoffreyC]

Dave-  thanks for the reply.  I guess that I will have to see Medinah for myself. I must say, however, it sounds akin to an appointment with the dentist unless my A game tags along that day (to be fair- much like WF, BB or OC)  

[SL_Solow]

Sorry to weigh in so late but its a busy time.  Shivas and I have had animated discussions about Medinah as we rate it differently.  Having said that, I think his description of the course is quite good, even if we might have some disagreement over individual hole ratings.  The real argument over Medinah relates to one's individual preferences pertaining to the characteristics of a "great" course.  Shivas places great value on length and difficulty.  I appreciate those characteristics but I place a much higher premium on variety and strategy.  Medinah is very long, very tight and very difficult.  A characteristic not often mentioned is that it possesses some very difficult greens.  But as compared to other great courses, it is very monotonous and it offers very few options.  Thus it is an examination in ball striking but can leave something to be desired as an overall golfing experience.  Top 100? Certainly, but not as high as GD has it in my personal listing.

[Gary_Smith]

For the pro game, I think #3 could actually use one more long 4 par, and one less 5 par. Quite of bit of #3's length is in those 4 par 5s. Before the Packard changes of the '80s, #3 had been a par 71. (but we're supposed to be far above the concept of par here, right?  ) I also wish some greens, such as 14, would be more open in front.

When you stand at the 4th tee, and look down the fairway, you are looking at the word "parkland".

Might the 17th, as a contrast to the long 13th, play best as a short, target 3 par? A flip 9 iron, nervy, late round thing. Water in front, and tightly bunkered or dropoffs on side. Just build the green with less back to front slope so you don't get the rebound effect that the Packard green had.

I hope that when the PGA/RC dance is over, #3 will return as an Open course.


.

[SL_Solow]

Shivas;  Ouch!  I didn't mean to suggest that length was a deciding factor or a requirement in your analysis of golf courses.  However your devotion to Medinah reflects a greater value on long tough courses than some of the rest of us.  As noted, you have the course described very accurately.  The value placed on it is where some of us differ and that is a matter of taste.  I happen to appreciate it more than some; e.g. Tom Doak.  I just don't like it as much as you.

[SL_Solow]

Don't think so.  When I was young (a long time ago chronologically) restrictions on membership made it a place my family could not join and guest invitations were rare.  Thus I only played it once or twice until I was well into my 20's.  I just think the course has more variety.

[Paul Richards]

Shivas and Shel:

To me, both OFCC-North and Medinah #3 are spectacular.  It's like asking "Do you want $1 million or do you want $1 million and 1."  I'd take either!

To me, OFCC-N is much more fun course to play every day.  Medinah is just too hard to play all the time!  I think Medinah is a better US Open course, although we'll see how OFCC stacks up this summer.  OFCC would seem to be a better PGA course, IMHO.  I really think that the pro's will love OFCC for the Open, but they will tear it up this summer.

I can't wait!

[SL_Solow]

Shivas; apples to oranges.  The issue is not which course fits better into the scheme of its particular club.  The question is which of the 2 courses does one prefer?  Beyond that I have little to add to my previous posts.  I have been waiting for Pail to weigh in.  As far as the US Open goes, difficulty will depend in large measure whether we get any rain or any wind.  Firm and fast plus wind woulkd be very interesting

[Paul Richards]

Shivas:

You are correct. If you don't want to get 'beat up', go play #1 or #2.

Your Winged Foot analogy isn't a good one in my book either.  The West is the big, bad monster like #3 (in fact it's a bigger and better #3, but that's another thread ),
but I didn't find the East to any beast.  It's just a good course, that's all.  You could play that one every day.

Same goes for OFCC.  The South course is an excellent golf course and is actually pretty underrated.  I think with a bit of TLC and a classic restoration job, that could be one of the really great courses in all of Chicago!

At the Open, I agree with Shel that the weather will really dictate how tough OFCC plays.  I think if the weather is nice, the pro's will go real low.

[SL_Solow]

Paul;  OFCC has called in Mark Mungeam who did the work on the North Course prior to the Senior Open as well as this year's US Open to renovate?restore the South course.

[Paul Richards]

shel:

That is good news indeed!  If Mark gives them the classical design that it deserves and that he is capable of producing, I have no doubt the the OFCC-South has the potential to be one of the better tracks in all of Illinois!

[Patrick_Mucci]

Paul Richards,

shel:

That is good news indeed!  If Mark gives them the classical design that it deserves and that he is capable of producing, I have no doubt the the OFCC-South has the potential to be one of the better tracks in all of Illinois!

But, what does the club want ?
For what specific purpose did they retain Mark ?
Does the club have a concept of what they want or are they leaving it to the discretion of Mark ?

[SL_Solow]

Pat;  I am not a member of OFCC but I have worked with Mark and I have been on panels with Dave Ward,OFCC's outstanding greenskeeper.  It is my understanding that Mark worked closely with the membership's representatives in approving the changes to the North course and I suspect he will do the same for the south course.  The interplay between the membership and the architect is a delicate one.  If the architect is a mere "scrivener" for the wishes of the membership then the need for "vision" on his part is eliminated.  On the other hand, the members own the club and thus the architect's vision should be consistent with the desires of the membership. Otherwise, in my opinion, the architect should not undertake the project as he will be faced with the Hobson's choice of either doing work that is inconsistent with his client's wishes or putting his name on work that does not reflect his artistic vision.   Based upon my work with Mark at Briarwood CC, I am confident that he is sensitive to these issues.