Rod Whitman...Wolf Creek and BlackHawk

[Mick]

I noticed that there was a feature interview with Rod Whitman here on the site.  I have played Wolf Creek numerous times and played Blackhawk earlier this summer.  I was wondering if anyone here had played these or any of his other designs and what their thoughts were...cheers

[Jeff_Mingay]

Mick,

I worked with Rod over three summers on the design and construction of Blackhawk. And I've spent quite a bit of time at Wolf Creek, too.

What's interesting to me, and evidence of Rod's creative talents and site-driven style of design, is how different both courses are. I mean, if you didn't know Whitman was the architect of both, you'd probably guess Blackhawk and Wolf Creek were laid out by different designers. Would you agree?

[Mick]

Jeff,

Good work at Blackhawk, only got to play it once this summer but loved it.  Friendly place too.  The super was out there asking our opinion (for what its worth - namely, not much)!  Both Wolf and Blackhawk are tremendously different in look.  However, the greens may give it away.  I'd like to hear your opinion on greens at at both and what similarities and differences you see.

[ed_getka]

I haven't seen these courses, but have heard good things about Wolf Creek and Rod's abilities. A gathering is being planned for Banff area next fall. How far are these courses from that area? I would love to see them if the logistics aren't too difficult.

[Mick]

Wolf Creek is about a three hour drive from Banff and Edmonton, where Blackhawk is, is another Hour or so north of there.  If you are doing both Jasper and Banff you can simply keep heading North-east to Edmonton from Jasper, then from there hit Wolf-Creek on the way back down to Calgary (I'm guessing that is where you are flying into).  In fact, you can see Wolf Creek from the main highway between Edmonton and Banff.  Total driving time for that circuit would be between 7-9 hours.

[Jeff_Mingay]

Mick,

Rod loves contour. And the greens at both Wolf Creek and Blackhawk are full of contour, indeed. That's become Rod's 'trademark', sort of speak. Golfers in Alberta talk of 'Whitman greens' in the same manner golfers in England talked about Mackenzie greens years ago.

Coincidentally, my favourite greens at Blackhawk are some of the more subtle ones, like 4, 6, 8, and 11. That said, I think there are a few more 'sophisticated' greens at Blackhawk. By that I guess I mean some very good greens without the type of blatant contour Rod's become well-known for.

Moreover, I think the greens at Blackhawk are generally set on more interesting angles to the line of play than those at Wolf Creek. As a result, Blackhawk seems to be a more strategic golf course.

Ed,

I think a perfect trip to Alberta would involve flying to Calgary, heading to Banff (less than an hour), then to Wolf Creek for 27 holes (approx. 2 hours), than to Blackhawk (another hour), than to Jasper (approx 3.4 hours).

You could then head back down toward Calgary, for the flight home, through the mountains on one of the world's most scenic car rides between Jasper and Banff.

Sounds like fun, eh!

[Mick]

Like I said I have only played Blackhawk once, but now that I think about it there are some really interesting angled greens.  Number 10, 12, 13 and 18 come immediately to mind.  Thinking back on the holes you mentioned, two of those are three pars.  I may be able to provide you with a couple of examples here.  4 I hit what I thought was a good shot, tugged it slightly.  Hit the left side of the green and away it went, which is as how it should be considering the better play was to the right.  #8 I loved.  Play a low running shot off the right side, which flowed down to a front left pin.  #11 was probably my favourite hole on the course, not for the spectacular drive, but for the careful second.  What is a short par 5 becomes tough with the fairway and green sloping away from you and water behind the green.  Got lucky here and thinned a 5 iron approach, ran right up to the front edge.

In terms of strategy, I would say that Blackhawk is more subtle.  I consider the Wolf to be a tough driving course (probably because I'm not very good), where the best line is more obvious and the penalities more severe.  Blackhawk gives you a tone of room to play but you really do want to be on the right side of the fairway.  A good example is number 13.  I hit what I thought was a good drive to the right of the central fairway bunker, then a good second over the short bunker, but low and behold, a little depression on that side of the green shrugged my ball off to the right 10 yards.  Hitting up the left side (up the side with a big river next to it) would have left me a better approach to the pin (I think, never got to try it).

[ed_getka]

Jeff,
  Thanks for the feedback. Sounds perfect for next years trip, except what is this 27 hole stuff?! Thats for lightweights! 54 holes is in order. .

[Jeff_Mingay]

Mick,

Very interesting observations on Blackhawk. You're thoughts on 13, in particular, describe the intended strategy of the hole perfectly. Driving to the left of the central fairway bunker, which requires a carry over the large 'short' bunker cut into the ridge there, leaves golfers with a much better angle into the green. No debate.

And, you're right too, the angle and contour in and around most of greens require golfers to position their ball in the correct spots, despite the blatant width. At Blackhawk, I think Rod really accomplished the ideal in golf architecture: which is, to present a stern test for better golfers, and at the same time, enough lateral forgiveness for less skilled players to enjoy themselves. The greens dictate strategy, which allows for those wide fairways, I think.

Wolf Creek is quite a bit more straight forward, and difficult. There's definitely less lateral forgiveness there.

Ed,

Wolf Creek has 27 holes, total. The original 18, which again, was completed in the early '80s, and the South nine, added 10 years later, in the early 1990s.

[Jeff_Mingay]

Not surprised you liked 11 either, Mick. That's the hole we anticpated golfers would rave about long before a speck of dirt was moved. We pushed out a high ridge at the shore of the natural pond there to create the peninsula green. And the view from the tee is pretty spectacular, too, isn't it?

Glad you liked 8 as well. It's one of my favourite holes on the course; one of four outstanding and varied par 3s, I think. But, because of it's lack of bunkers, and its comparative lack of 'visual drama', I anticipated most golfers would consider it one of the less glamourous holes out there. Hope your opinion of 8 is shared by others, and that my hunch about the hole is proved to be incorrect.

The key to Rod's very smart routing of the course was getting 1, 8, 9 and 10 to work properly. The hillside that 9 and 10 play across somewhat complicated getting the holes up top (2 thru 7)  and the holes in the valley (11 thru 18) -- which were naturally 'there for the pickings' -- together. I'd be interested to hear your opinions on 1, 9 and 10?

[Mick]

Number 11 does have great visual impact, but it really is the second shot that I Love there.  Its got to be tough stopping anything that lands on that green, especially as most people will be using mid-long irons.

#1.  I thought this hole got the round off to a good start.  Uphill blind tee-shot as I remember.  I guess the best play is up the right side with a fairway the slopes left to right.  Although that is not how I played...shanked into the bushes on the right.  I liked the hole, its just too bad it takes so long to see the best part of the property but as you said the transition from upper to lower is difficult.

#9.  Good short par four, downhill.  I didnt have the guts to go for the green though.  The fact its surrounded by trees through me off.  hit three-wood up the right side.  I seem to remember hitting a low sandwegde and bouncing it onto the green.  The fact I could run shots up there was great.

#10.  The opposite of 9.  Uphill short par 4, again tight.  This hole had a great green.  Perched at the top of the hill with a ugly looking bunker on the right, with the pin just past it...guess what side of the fairway I left my tee shot on...yep.  Hit what I thought was a great 9 iron over the bunker only to be lumped to the back of the green for a massive breaking down hill put.  My putt must have broken 10 feet, but I still can't see how.

#9 & 10 are both good holes, but they do seem a bit out of place.  That is, the rest of the course has a pretty open feel to it, while these two holes are extremely tight, with no chance for recovery from the trees.  To me though, it just adds a bit of variety and shows that Rod Whitman worked with what he had.  My buddy, who put two in the trees on 9, probably has a different view.  I get the same impression at Wolf, where the majority of the holes are out in the sandy soil of prairies and the rest duck in and out of trees surrounding the creek.

Oh, Ed if you do play the Wolf, play the West/East original combo first.  Its the way it started off, the south nine was added later.

[Mick]

Jeff, I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on #4 and #9 West and #3 (the gorge) East.

[Mick]

...at wolf creek!

[Jeff_Mingay]

Mick,

I'm also surprised that you're impressed with the second shot on 11. I'm getting the impression you're either a true architecture enthusaist or simply a golfer who enjoys old-style adventure! Either way, you're a friend of mine!

Rod had some reservation about that second shot there, at 11: blind, over a hill to a green that runs away from you, toward water behind -- water that you can't see from where you're playing the second shot!

Still, I agree, it's a neat shot, with a plethora of options availabe, whether you decide to lay-up or go for the green in two. And, of course, the situation is only 'blind' once. Next time you play, for example, you'll have more info. to make a reasoned decision on how to play that shot.

Same goes for the first. The drive is only blind over the hill once. The idea is to drive down the right side of the fairway, skirting those bushes you shanked into (!), in order to avoid having to play over the deep greenside bunker at left, into the shallowest portion of the putting surface, which is set on a right-to-left diagonal. Pretty simple formula that continues to make for interesting play.

The first appears rather simple in fact, and it's short, but it's a strategic hole that requires two well-played strokes, complicated by a ton of contour through the green, all of which, for the record, was artifically created.(Bet you couldn't have guessed it?!?!)

More on those holes at Wolf Creek you asked about later...

[Mick]

Jeff,

Cheers Jeff.  An architecture enthuasist, maybe, but I've always liked courses that let me play different shots.  I tend to lose focus when asked to do the same thing over and over again.  Having said that since finding this site, I've definetly taken an interest in the architectural side.

I wonder how much different my opinion of 11 would be if I hit my five iron crisp rather than thinning it low (ie. Low runner) to the front edge.  As you said though it's a unique shot and its only blind once.  

There is another hole with a blind drive that I'm interested in hearing your thoughts on.  #7 walking over that hill the sense of the width your given is unmistakable.  Its like you have a field to hit into, but its not the case as you really don't want to come in from the left.  Still though the view is fantastic.

[Jeff_Mingay]

Mick,

The hill you drive over on 7 was originally much higher. I'd say, almost as high as where 2 green sits, adjacent to 7 fairway. We took quite a bit of good material off the top of that hill, both to make the drive at 7 managable and to generate fill material required to create many of the artificial features at holes 2 thru 7, and elsewhere.

The second half of 7 fairway presents extraordinary width, doesn't it. But the hole bends around to the right, and those three bunkers in the direct line to the green force golfers to make a decision regarding where to play their second shot. There's a lot of room left, but a lay up to there leaves a comparatively awkward third over the deep greenside bunker (shaped by Dave Axland), into the shallowest portion of the green (although the putting surface is banked toward you from that angle, isn't it).

I roughed in that green back in summer 2001. The idea originally was to create a green with characteristics similar to the Road green at the Old Course. Rod finish shaped the green, and the concept changed a bit through that process, but still, there are some similarities to the Road green: going left of the green with your second shot leaves you that pitched over that deep bunker into the shallowest portion of the green (a la the Road Hole). On the other hand, laying up right, over those centre fairway bunkers, will leave you with a look down the length of the green and an option to run the ball onto the putting surface, along the ground (a la the Road Hole).

So, next time you're out there and you hit a good drive at 7, try to lay up over the bunkers, more toward the right side of the green. Again, that should leave a completely different approach to the hole than the one you faced from the left side of the green during your first time around Blackhawk.

[Jeff_Mingay]

Mick,

4 and 12 (3 East, I guess) are unlike most other holes at Wolf Creek, aren't they. Wolf Creek is very wide open for the most part, but these two holes feature narrow, tree-lined fairways. Although they're not two of my favourite holes, they do, ironically, feature two of my favourite greens at Wolf Creek.

I don't think much else could have been done to give 4 additional width because of the steep hillside on the left and the creek on the right. That hole is what it is: a short par 4, where smart golfers play a long iron off the tee in an attempt to 'thread the needle' (read: keep it in play).

As for 12, Rod's been advising the powers that be to cut trees there for years now, as a means to restore some width to the hole. Originally, 20 + years ago, 12 wasn't nearly as tight as it is today. Still, they seem to be refusing to cut any trees, despite Whitman's advice. At least for now, anyway.

9 is an extremely difficult hole, isn't it: a long par 4 (in the 440 yard range), where the second shot is played to a green sitting immediately on the opposite side of a deep ravine, framed by trees and thick undergrowth on either side. The approach is 'do or die'. There's nowhere to safely miss, although you can lay up with a wedge, then play another wedge to the green, but that's not very exciting.

Many potentially good rounds have been ruined at the 9th. In fact, the Alberta Open was played at Wolf Creek for many consecutive years during the 1980s and early 90s, and there are a number of horror stories about Canadian Tour pros taking double-digit scores there!

[Jeff_Mingay]

Thinking about it, Wolf Creek epitomized 'prairie golf' almost 20 years before Axland's and Proctor's Wild Horse in Nebraska was built. Both courses were built on the same ethic. And, coincidentally, Dave and Dan worked with Rod on the design and construction of Wolf Creek.

There's some interesting golf architecture history for you!

[Mick]

Sorry it took so long to reply Jeff...Thanksgiving and all.  I really wish they would add some width to 12 at the Wolf.  That hole has killed me twice when I have had good rounds going.  Anything left is dead.  This makes it tough when the ideal shot is a soft draw.  If you over cook it you're done.  Having said that I find the hole a challenge and enjoy playing it well, but I much prefer the 'open' holes up top.

I wonder if you could provide some insight into number 17 green at Blackhawk...I found this green particularly unique - cheers

[Jeff_Mingay]

17 is one of my favourite greens, too, Mick. It's simply an extension of the fairway, bascially separated into three distinct 'cupping areas' at front, back-left and back-right, by gentle terraces. And, of course, there's that large knob in the centre of the green! Between the subgrade and the final grade that knob evolved into a very prominent feature, which makes it difficult to putt from one section of the green to another, doesn't it.

The golfer's objective, ideally, is to hit the correct section of the green in order to have a decent chance to two-putt.

We created that large depression which starts about 100 yards short of the green, and runs parallel to the hole up to the left side of the putting surface. I spent about a week on a D-6 widening a narrow ditch that was there when we showed up.

The 'trench bunker' benched into the right side of that depression, just short of the green, was inspired by some similar bunkers Rod saw on a visit to Pine Valley just before we started construction at Blackhawk (I'm thinking, left side and short of 13 green at PV, down in that similar depression/valley there).

Back to 17 green, notice that it's tilted from right to left as well, with a slight Redan 'kicker bank' type feature at front right of the putting surface. 17's a long par 4, 445 yards or so played slightly uphill, into the prevailing wind. The orientation and slope of the green, combined with the 'kicker bank' we created is intended to allow smarter golfers to play a low draw from a long distance around the aforementioned depression that will (theoretically) 'kick' left and take the slope down to a back-left hole location.

This is (potentially) a great match-play hole, late in the round, because a better golfer who's hit a decent drive will probably be suckered into flying it right at a back-left hole location, which is guarded by another deep bunker cut into the upslope of the depression, immediately adjacent to the putting surface. It's one of the more heavily treed areas on the course, so it's sometimes difficult to feel that prevailing wind, into you, which results in underclubbing.

A classically-inspired golf architect (like Rod Whitman) would like nothing more than to see a keen, comparatively short-hitter out smart a stronger opponent by figuring out the strategy of the hole and executing the proper shot!

Perhaps we overthink these things  

[Mick]

There may be some over thinking involved but I think the results speak for themselves.  Interesting golf holes that provide variety.  In fact, I love that some of the better golfers I play with struggled at Blackhawk this summer, when the driver-wedge strategy was not always the best play.

Jeff, are you from Alberta, or have you just spent time out there due to Blackhawk and Thompson courses in the Rockies?

[Jeff_Mingay]

I'm based in Windsor, Ontario, Mick. Directly across the river from Detroit, Michigan. But I have spent a lot of time in Alberta over the past three summers.

[Mick]

Ah, I have being in Kingston, Ontario the past couple of years, but still manage to get back to Edmonton sometime during the summer months.

Jeff, you mentioned that the dirt from the shaving of the hill on 7 was used to make some artificial features on 2-7 and elsewhere.  I saw very little that looked to be artificially created on the course, could you enlighten me as to what was built.  On a similar note, how much dirt did you guys move around out there?  

[Jeff_Mingay]

With the exception of the large hill that 2 plays into, 3 plays off of, 5 plays into, 6 plays off of, and 7 plays over (genius routing really, somewhat similar to Ross' use of the high points on the property at Seminole, I think), the area comprised of holes 2 thru 7 was fairly flat. So, most of the features on those holes, with the exception of 2 green, 3 and 6 tees required fill generate from the hilltop at 7 fairway.

Nice compliment, Mick, about few features on the course appearing unnatural. Several prominent people in the business would back me up in saying Rod's one of the most talented shapers in golf. He's very good at making artifical features appear natural. And he was personally involved with the shaping of nearly every significant feature at Blackhawk. Nearly. As you say, much of the artifical stuff at Blackhawk is indistinguishable from the natural features on the property.

Here's a good story about Rod: once the fill was in place to create the 'dunes like' features in 7 fairway that all of the bunkers there were eventually cut into, Rod let another 'dozer guy working with us do some initial shaping. In short, his work looked very dome-like when he was done. Very artifical.

Without saying anything to anyone, Rod apparently stayed on-site late into that evening and reworked those features, 'cause when I returned in the morning, I couldn't believe how natural those little 'dunes' appeared to be. It's difficult to explain here the detail Rod put into these features using a D-6; features certain architects and contractors probably would have considered incidental.

Rod still considers his greatest triumph to be the original 18 holes at Wolf Creek. Few people realize that 'dunes like' site was nearly flat when they started. In fact, Rod has often heard, 'Boy, you made the best of a wonderful site,' from visiting golfers. No, for the record, he made the very best of a property with decent topography.

Rod laughs at the term 'minimalism'. In other words, he knows when to leave well enough alone, utilizing natural attributes of a given property. But he's not adverse to moving dirt and building when 'the golf's not there'.

How much dirt did we move at Blackhawk? None of it was measure, so I'm not exactly sure. But I can say, not much in creating the actual golf course features. The pond you drive over on 4 and the pond at 16 had to be created as part of the storm water management plan, other wise, we basically built tees and greens and excavated bunkers. Inherently, most of the property was interesting enough to begin with.

[Mick]

Jeff,

It's definetly no surprise to learn that you guys did n't move much dirt.  i had no idea there were any 'artificial' features on 7, which is surprising because that hole really intrigued me.  I'm looking forward to playing there again armed with all this inside knowledge, not that it will help my game.

I must admit when I read in his feature interview that Rod had moved a lot of dirt at Wolf, I was very surprised.  Even now other than maybe 5 (around the green) and 15 (hills lining the fairway), I just don't see where the dirt was moved.  In thinking about the Wolf, one thing I overlooked is the amount of elevation change on the holes there.  On the front you are hitting down to 1, 3, 7 and up to 2, 6.  On the back its down to 11, 14, 15, 16 and up to 12, 13, 17. Well 12 is up on the drive and then the fairway and green run away from you.  Actually 18 may be even slightly down hill to the green.  It really is my favourite course (not that I have played any of the classics talked about here).  Tough but fair, well except for 4 & 12 (guaranteed one of them will kill my score).  Maybe I should play more matches instead.