News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


Sean Leary

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Clear Creek
« Reply #50 on: August 26, 2010, 07:40:05 PM »
Sean,

There was never any mention here about King's Putter untl late in the thread. I thought it should have been mentioned earlier. KP was over in early June- 3 months ago. I thought people were talking about a recent play.

I think JC was talking about a recent play. Who should have mentioned it? And why? JC started it by asking if it was a home run, and I don't believe he was at KP this year. Some others on this posted here played it during the KP but I am guessing others have played it on their own through other avenues. Is everyone who posts supposed to say how they gained access for every course in every thread on here?

It seems like you knew the answer of "Is it public" on both threads and were trying to make a point, thats all. What point I really am not sure.

Maybe I am off on this but your logic that every person that posts on every private golf course they have played explaining how they got access is bizarre to me.


Joel_Stewart

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Clear Creek
« Reply #51 on: August 26, 2010, 08:30:23 PM »
I have played both Martis Camp and Clear Creek.  Not a contest in my mind, Clear Creek is better architecturally.  Martis Camp may have better views and a bit more drama in the surrounding land, but Clear Creek is playable, fun and thought provoking.  Martis Camp is a bit hard and unforgiving in a few places.
The typical rich guy, looking for status and amenities will migrate toward Martis Camp.  The avid player will migrate toward Clear Creek.  The range is pretty, but the best features are the ball and small tee line.
I know that USC guy, Gib or something has played Martis Camp, don't know about Clear Creek.  I would welcome his input if he has played both.  Maybe he is too buys up in Seattle visiting his man, Pete Carroll.
I haven't played Timilick.  I hear one 9 came out pretty good.  I am guessing it will be behind Clear Creek and Martis Camp on my ranking, if I did that sort of thing.


Lynn:

I'm a USC guy so will answer.   I haven't talked to Pete Carroll lately (or ever) but when I was on the practice range at Martis Camp, Terry Donohue was there.  So Terry comes over and introduces himself and I told him "Terry I'm a USC guy" and he looks me in the eye and says "I'm over that stuff".

I don't disagree with your assessment but would probably put them in a tie for the best courses in Tahoe.  I would be happy to split 10 rounds evenly.  I do disagree with you in that Martis Camp has some outstanding holes architecturally, especially the back nine.  The bunkers as mentioned are severe, way to severe in my mind for the average player.  They are deep, and I have no idea how a high handicap player could possibly get out of a few of them.

I would probably rate the Tahoe courses in the following order and I have played all of them.

Clear Creek
Martis Camp
Coyote Moon
Incline Village
Lahontin
Old Greenwood
Edgewood
Timilick
Grays Crossing
Squaw Creek

astavrides

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Clear Creek
« Reply #52 on: August 26, 2010, 08:57:29 PM »
Joel,
Is Squaw Creek better than Tahoe Donner and Northstar?  If not, I won't bother with it.  I haven't played Squaw, but I have played the other two.
By the way, I think Coyote is pretty good, but I personally would put it below everything else on your list.

Lynn_Shackelford

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Clear Creek
« Reply #53 on: August 27, 2010, 12:16:09 AM »
Joel you don't need to talk to Pete, he is long gone.

I agree that the Clear Creek edge over Martis is not that big, but Martis had a great site and went too far with those bunkers and to a lesser extent the greens.

I think Coyote Moon gets rated too high because of its drama in elevation changes.  I would not enjoy playing it daily, I think it can be a bit unforgiving.

Everyone is overlooking White Hawk Ranch, one of the area's very best.
It must be kept in mind that the elusive charm of the game suffers as soon as any successful method of standardization is allowed to creep in.  A golf course should never pretend to be, nor is intended to be, an infallible tribunal.
               Tom Simpson

Patrick Kiser

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Clear Creek
« Reply #54 on: August 27, 2010, 01:13:50 AM »


I would probably rate the Tahoe courses in the following order and I have played all of them.

...
...
Coyote Moon
Incline Village
...
Old Greenwood
Edgewood
Timilick
Grays Crossing
...


Joel,

In this order.  Really?  I guess I'm a little surprised.  Everyone's different, so not criticizing.

“One natural hazard, however, which is more
or less of a nuisance, is water. Water hazards
absolutely prohibit the recovery shot, perhaps
the best shot in the game.” —William Flynn, golf
course architect

Tom Huckaby

Re: Clear Creek
« Reply #55 on: August 27, 2010, 11:44:13 AM »
I'd put exactly as Joel has them.  I just haven't played Grays Crossing.

Clear Creek
Martis Camp
Coyote Moon
Incline Village
Lahontan
Old Greenwood
Edgewood
Timilick
Squaw Creek

Maybe switch Edgewood and Timilick.  But it's close enough to leave as is, not worth arguing about.

USC, so sad, so sad.  But they will rise again, of that I have no doubt.  Lynn watch out for Santa Clara hoops - we may finally reap some of what Keating has been sewing this season.  Maybe.   ;)

Matt_Ward

Re: Clear Creek
« Reply #56 on: August 27, 2010, 12:15:00 PM »
Lynn:

Curious to your love for White Hawk Ranch. I may have some available time to play it during a finishing swing through Reno next week. What can you add to your feelings for the course? I'd be very interested in your comments.

Thanks ...

p.s. what separates it from the other courses in the immediate area ?

Patrick Kiser

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Clear Creek
« Reply #57 on: August 27, 2010, 12:49:25 PM »
No offense to Brad in any way, but Coyote Moon did not do too much for me.  Topography wise, it's like Lincoln on steroids.  The course was a slog.  Then again, Coyote Moon was in poor shape for the KP.

Certainly found Timilick, Grays' and even Old Greenwood to be more fun and interesting.


“One natural hazard, however, which is more
or less of a nuisance, is water. Water hazards
absolutely prohibit the recovery shot, perhaps
the best shot in the game.” —William Flynn, golf
course architect

Dan Grossman

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Clear Creek
« Reply #58 on: August 27, 2010, 12:58:01 PM »
Regarding White Hawk Ranch, I agree with Lynn that it is fantastic.  I haven't played any of the private mentioned, but I would definetely drive to Clio (about 40 mins north of Truckee, I think) and play there rather than Coyote Moon.  Its been about 8 years since I have played either course, but I remember White Hawk to be very interesting, the routing moving from the plains to the trees and back.  I think the greens are fairly interesting and it is a lot of fun to play.

Tom Huckaby

Re: Clear Creek
« Reply #59 on: August 27, 2010, 04:18:13 PM »
I haven't played White Hawk.

I also played Coyote Moon several years ago, it was in fantastic shape, I happily took a cart, it was a beautiful day, I drank a bit... so well... perhaps  the memory is better than the reality these days.  But still... my recollection is a damn fun golf course.


Tom Yost

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Clear Creek
« Reply #60 on: August 27, 2010, 04:53:34 PM »
No offense to Brad in any way, but Coyote Moon did not do too much for me.  Topography wise, it's like Lincoln on steroids.  The course was a slog.  Then again, Coyote Moon was in poor shape for the KP.


A slog indeed, but to be fair, Coyote had just opened the week before, after a very long and wet winter.  Four feet tall piles of snow in the trees behind many of the greens.   :o   


Lynn_Shackelford

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Clear Creek
« Reply #61 on: August 27, 2010, 05:26:32 PM »
Matt, White Hawk Ranch
1.  They have a great twilight rate and the late afternoons are delightful.  It is oh so peaceful there.
2.  Simple little place, very nice warm-up area right in front of simple little clubhouse.
3.  Playable for all abilities.  I have played there twice with some old college mates.  Wide range of ability and yet everyone enjoys it.
4.  Dan is correct, you are in trees, out in pasture land, back into trees.
5.  Routing-there are no more than two holes that go in any direction.
6.  No goofy holes except 18.  Straightforward stuff and you can actually have fun thinking about what and where to hit the ball on par 4's and 5's on the tee.  They have some wide fairways.

One issue for you, it is not long and you may have 3 wood in your hand.  I have not played the back tees.
It must be kept in mind that the elusive charm of the game suffers as soon as any successful method of standardization is allowed to creep in.  A golf course should never pretend to be, nor is intended to be, an infallible tribunal.
               Tom Simpson

Matt_Ward

Re: Clear Creek
« Reply #62 on: August 27, 2010, 05:52:49 PM »
Lynn:

Many thanks to you and the others for the info.

I have played many of the top tier courses in the area and will be playing Clear Creek sometime next week.

I appreciate your take on the others you mentioned -- including Martis Camp.

Curious to know if you have played Lahontan -- I really enjoyed the Weiskopf course.

I hope to schedule a side visit to White Hawk Ranch -- if you had to assign a Doak number to it what would it be ?

many thanks again ...

Joel_Stewart

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Clear Creek
« Reply #63 on: August 27, 2010, 10:25:35 PM »
Joel,
Is Squaw Creek better than Tahoe Donner and Northstar?  If not, I won't bother with it.  I haven't played Squaw, but I have played the other two.
By the way, I think Coyote is pretty good, but I personally would put it below everything else on your list.

Squaw Creek is dead last.  Add Tahoe Donner and Northstar above it.  I haven't played those courses in many years but they have to be better than Squaw Creek.

I haven't played Whitehawk but have always heard good things about it.  I was going to play it in the afternoon a few years ago after The Dragon at Gold Mountain but was so disgusted and beat up at that course I bagged it.

The other course which could rate fairly high on the list is Montraux.

Joel_Stewart

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Clear Creek
« Reply #64 on: August 27, 2010, 10:31:41 PM »
I guess I should go back to Coyote Moon?  The course was in great condition a few years ago but they did have an awful winter in Tahoe so maybe they just haven't recovered?  I like the routing and it's the only course with no housing lining the fairways except for Clear Creek and those homes are coming as soon as the economy picks up.

Patrick Kiser

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Clear Creek
« Reply #65 on: August 28, 2010, 12:36:26 PM »
No offense to Brad in any way, but Coyote Moon did not do too much for me.  Topography wise, it's like Lincoln on steroids.  The course was a slog.  Then again, Coyote Moon was in poor shape for the KP.


A slog indeed, but to be fair, Coyote had just opened the week before, after a very long and wet winter.  Four feet tall piles of snow in the trees behind many of the greens.   :o    




Tom is definitely correct here.

But even today and soft conditions aside (including rough greens) as I think back what I remember is this:  elevated tee to downhill canted fairway to elevated green.  Next tee commence again...  Boulders near green.

Of course not every hole was this way, but many were up and down and up and down like this.  It felt rather repetitive at times for me.  I only remember one green with creeping boulders but it stuck with me.

The thing is I think the lay of the land and topography is the problem for me.  Just too severe and you can't blame Brad for that.

But this is a Clear Creek thread and I'll stop there.


Jonathan,

Why haven't you started on the 13th and 18th yet?  Two fantastic par 5s at Clear Creek in my opinion.

« Last Edit: August 28, 2010, 12:45:57 PM by Patrick Kiser »
“One natural hazard, however, which is more
or less of a nuisance, is water. Water hazards
absolutely prohibit the recovery shot, perhaps
the best shot in the game.” —William Flynn, golf
course architect

Matt_Ward

Re: Clear Creek
« Reply #66 on: September 06, 2010, 06:14:20 PM »
Patrick:

You asked Jonathan about the two par-5's at Clear Creek -- the 13th and 18th.

I really enjoyed both of them -- especially the 13th. The key with #13 is getting your tee shot near to the right side -- the better you're able to do that it allows for a better opportunity for your second.

The challenge at both holes deals with leaving yourself in a position for a much eaiser pitch to the target. At #13 anything with serious pace can run off the back into near oblivion. The frontal pin placement on #13 is absolutely a terror.

On #18 the tee shot sets the terms -- if one can hug the right side with a slight cut you can benefit from the downslope that's available with a sufficient carry off the tee. Again, the green is well done with a microscopic pot bunker blocking the centerpoint to the green. Any shot with too much pace that hits towards the left side can simply go miles and miles into unknown territory. Those who opt for the right side avoid such a fate and can have a much easier pitch and possible birdie.

Tiger_Bernhardt

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Clear Creek
« Reply #67 on: September 06, 2010, 09:02:27 PM »
I think CC and MC create golf strength in the Tahoe area. I am in the minority in thinking MC is the better of the two on all levels. But both a very good courses and the creme of the Tahoe cup.

Matt_Ward

Re: Clear Creek
« Reply #68 on: September 07, 2010, 12:44:45 PM »
Tiger:

I appreciate your fondnessfor MC -- but a quick sentence with little depth of "why" and how CC is lacking when held together would be interesting to read.

You need to put some flesh on the skeleton.

Patrick Kiser

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Clear Creek New
« Reply #69 on: September 08, 2010, 12:41:08 AM »
Matt,

I actually felt somewhat different about the 13th and here's why:


13th Hole:  This hole was my favorite along with the 18th on this back nine.  From the fairway, you can see how there's a diagonal ridge breaking to a lower plateau short of the right hand bunker and heads forward left.  If you land short and into that lower fairway area and are to the right ... you are completely blind for what lies short of the green.  Depth perception here is very tricky and especially as you look towards what appears to be a crowning green.  So you throttle back thinking don't go long.  Bad move...  You just landed in a blind valley and you're now completely blind.  Freaking awesome!  With some luck you might have landed short and left of the small green side bunker and your ball held.  If you went right, that ball will not hold and down it goes.  A total kick in the nads.







« Last Edit: June 05, 2011, 09:07:55 PM by Patrick Kiser »
“One natural hazard, however, which is more
or less of a nuisance, is water. Water hazards
absolutely prohibit the recovery shot, perhaps
the best shot in the game.” —William Flynn, golf
course architect

Matt_Ward

Re: Clear Creek
« Reply #70 on: September 08, 2010, 01:05:24 PM »
Patrick:

I can't dispute the qualities of the two holes -- but I liked #13 more so. It's a very demanding par-5 and the slightest nap by the player and it's a sure fire bogey or more. Those players encountering a front right pin location will need to work extra hard for any potential low score.

Patrick Kiser

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Clear Creek
« Reply #71 on: September 08, 2010, 01:23:29 PM »
Matt,

I thought both were great ... in how they were different as well.

I agree with you about the front right pin placement on the 13th being killer.  Actually ... evil and mean.  And for that, going right is probably the best angle.  Opens up the green a little and you don't have to risk the front bunker as much perhaps.
« Last Edit: September 08, 2010, 02:40:46 PM by Patrick Kiser »
“One natural hazard, however, which is more
or less of a nuisance, is water. Water hazards
absolutely prohibit the recovery shot, perhaps
the best shot in the game.” —William Flynn, golf
course architect

Matt_Ward

Re: Clear Creek
« Reply #72 on: September 08, 2010, 02:22:17 PM »
Patrick:

Clear Creek works not only because of such holes and the outstanding scenery but C&C have smartly designed many of the greens to be long and thin -- with fall-offs to the sides. Clearly, #13 is different than that but the falloffs are still there.

There are also turning holes -- like the outstanding 9th (what a green !) and the counterpoint with the dog-leg right 10th with a fairway that will kick balls further left with the slightest tug left from the tee.

Can't say enough good things about the course -- for all the ink that Bandon Trails and Hidden Creek get -- Clear Creek is much more consistent design wise than either of the two.

Jonathan Cummings

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Clear Creek
« Reply #73 on: September 08, 2010, 05:33:34 PM »
Agree very much with Matt.  Great course in a magical setting.  Another attribute true about CC is its breadth of difficulty.  Hard from the back but quite benign from were us teen handicappers play.  Putting the CC greens were a joy - just pure fun.  I wish them all the success possible.  JC

Matt_Ward

Re: Clear Creek
« Reply #74 on: September 08, 2010, 06:04:22 PM »
Jonathan:

What amazed me is how the layout is under 6,900 yards and is quite challenging without the mega length because of the altitude. The green dimensions, overall contours and the turning points on many of the longer holes all keep the better players at bay. Working the ball from side-to-side is a big time asset at CC.

How would you rate the course against other C&C layouts you have played?

thanks ...