[Brad Tufts]

Having not played the Black, I'd probably go 7-3 or 6-4 Blue v. Red.


The courses are difficult to analyze, as they are on similar land in a similar design style.


I've always thought of C&C courses as "look hard, play forgiving" v. Tom's courses being more "looks forgiving, play hard," but this is obviously a generalization with exceptions.  With the two side-by-side like this, I found the generalization to be appropriate.  The Red seems to intimidate in look, but there is room on the approaches, and the greens aren't too wild.  The Blue to me seems more forgiving in appearance, with more difficult approach shots to greens that may repel a slight mishit.  This is all going back a one-day visit with two rounds in 2013, so I used Joe's photos to refresh my memory of the holes.


And I will repeat the call for a Black course photo tour!

[Mark Saltzman]

Kalen, I guess I'm having a hard time explaining this.  In 1130 golf courses I've never seen a set of greens I considered over-the-top... until now.  I'd love to hear other's thoughts on this.  I can't imagine I'm alone.

[Mark Saltzman]

And I will repeat the call for a Black course photo tour!

I can't seem to find the thread on this... can someone suggest a site other than Photobucket to use to upload photos.  It was a bit of a grey day when I played SSB, but photos are probably good enough to get a discussion going.

[Tom_Doak]

Blue loses steam at 9, and 10 seems completely out of character. The caddies in my group did not like 11 but I thought that low, naked green was a cool, gutsy move given the topography and longer shot coming into it.

Derek:


Those were the compromises we had to make in the routing to get 36 holes onto a site that only really had about 28-30 holes we loved.  The Red course had to incorporate the difficult land for holes 2-3-4 and the duller land for 10-11-12, while the Blue had to take on the duller land for 9-10-11. 


We could have chosen to jack those holes up with more earthmoving, but both Bill and I independently decided to take a gentler approach, that jacking them up would not benefit the course as a whole.  Those who want "18 postcards" might disagree, but you don't play golf on postcards!

[Tom_Doak]

Add to the fact that balls ending up on the green, on the far side of the contouring, leaves the golfer with the only option of putting (no one is going to chip from a green)

I thought that people were making too big a deal of what portion of the surface was "green", but I had never thought of this circumstance.  I might chip anyway from those spots, but I probably wouldn't hit a shot where I might take a divot, so I agree with your point.


There were some of those little mounds and swales at the edges of the greens that I would seriously like to go out and watch the crew mow.  I played with a friend who's a superintendent, and he pointed out that they didn't seem to have any scalping issues with mowing those areas, but you'd have to be pretty athletic to do it ... and I don't think there's any way a triplex would handle them*, so that means they are walk-mowing a VERY big area.


* EDIT - I'm informed that they do triplex mow the greens on the Black.  Now I would really like to see how it's done.

[Kalen Braley]

Kalen, I guess I'm having a hard time explaining this.  In 1130 golf courses I've never seen a set of greens I considered over-the-top... until now.  I'd love to hear other's thoughts on this.  I can't imagine I'm alone.

I suppose it could get old if all 18 greens were like this.  I absolutely love Pasa 16 and to this day remains the most interesting green I've even played.  But I'm not sure I would want all 18 holes to be like that...


P.S.  Jim Engh builds some pretty wild greens, I recall one at Redlands Mesa where I was in such a bad spot, I was just trying to 3 putt! 

[John Kavanaugh]

I thought Pinehurst #2 bastardized the experience when they made a local rule that you can take a practice swing in the raked greenside bunkers. Obviously the Black will have to make a similar rule preventing people from chipping on the greens. I know, I know...you can't chip on the green at #6 Riviera, but you don't need to.

[John Kavanaugh]

Jim Engh gets a pass...as in Metro.

[Ally Mcintosh]

Mark,


I had assumed that the external mounding was cut at green height only as far as the bottom of the exterior slopes of the mounds. But it sounds like there are flat areas on the outside where the ball could come to rest, hence creating those impossible putts.


I'm really intrigued to see the course now. To see a course where the wild greens are divisive to those who usually love the same will always provide some learning.

[Derek_Duncan]

Blue loses steam at 9, and 10 seems completely out of character. The caddies in my group did not like 11 but I thought that low, naked green was a cool, gutsy move given the topography and longer shot coming into it.

Derek:


Those were the compromises we had to make in the routing to get 36 holes onto a site that only really had about 28-30 holes we loved.  The Red course had to incorporate the difficult land for holes 2-3-4 and the duller land for 10-11-12, while the Blue had to take on the duller land for 9-10-11. 


We could have chosen to jack those holes up with more earthmoving, but both Bill and I independently decided to take a gentler approach, that jacking them up would not benefit the course as a whole.  Those who want "18 postcards" might disagree, but you don't play golf on postcards!

Tom,


I understand what you're saying. I was curious to see what you were going to do along that north side where the land was less jazzed. I actually think 9 is a fine hole with a nice green, and like I said, 11 is cool and difficult and works well as a transportation hole.


I am curious about 10 -- would you make the same decision now not to do more earth work, or do you still like it as a pre-cursor to the long run at 11? To me it's the only hole on the Blue that seems two-dimensional.


Derek

[Frank M]

I'm hopefully down there next month.

[Joel_Stewart]

Kalen, I guess I'm having a hard time explaining this.  In 1130 golf courses I've never seen a set of greens I considered over-the-top... until now.  I'd love to hear other's thoughts on this.  I can't imagine I'm alone.

I agree with you. I was discussing this today with someone who couldn't understand why Kemper or someone from Mosaic didn't speak with Gil about the greens? I'm also baffled how Gil could think these greens are appropriate for a resort with many higher handicap players?


As I said on another thread my choice would be Blue, Black and then Red.


Blue is the most all round fun course. Lots of risk reward, interesting greens and some clever architecture.


Black is the most interesting course tee to green. The greens ruined it, it was just a grind.


Red, difficult open and then great stretch through the 9th. The back 9 is very difficult that lacked any fun.

[Tom_Doak]

I am curious about 10 -- would you make the same decision now not to do more earth work, or do you still like it as a pre-cursor to the long run at 11? To me it's the only hole on the Blue that seems two-dimensional.

The only thing I'm not thrilled with about #10 is that I'm not sure we got the tees in the right places.  It goes from very difficult on the two back tees, to pretty short on the next one up.  It's the only "medium length" par-3 on the course, and it kind of misses "medium" a little.


But I couldn't be happier with the hole itself.  We moved more earth than you think there, to get short balls to feed toward the deep left bunker, even though the whole world tilted to the right.  But #16 and #5 were both left-to-right shots, and I didn't want to have three on the course.  I like that there is still the remnant of the trees that once went all the way across the hole, and the sandy waste off the tee that looks a little bit like Kingston Heath, without being overdone.  And that is a trickier green than it generally gets credit for.  It was never going to be the most memorable hole on the course, and I'm glad that we didn't try to make it that.

[James Brown]

All three courses are awesome tests, fun to play, and good walks. 


I would say Red edges Blue by a hair.  Black needs some time to grow on people.  Red has some really great holes.  12-18 is a really great finishing stretch.  15 is just a great hole.  14 and 16 are really thrilling par 3s. 


Blue doesn’t have the greatest part of the land.  And Blue 18 is way harder that 1 Red.  1 Red just requires a long tee shot to disarm it.  It’s miles wide.   18 Blue requires both a long straight tee ball and a long high second shot. 

[Tom_Doak]

Blue doesn’t have the greatest part of the land.  And Blue 18 is way harder that 1 Red.  1 Red just requires a long tee shot to disarm it.  It’s miles wide.   18 Blue requires both a long straight tee ball and a long high second shot.

To each his own, I guess, but I think Bill Coore would tell you Blue had the greatest part of the land.


Also, I was happy for my 18th hole to be harder than anyone's first hole, that's the way people usually expect it to be.  But I have seen people make 4 on the 18th hole with two power fades, or [like me two weeks ago] with a low shot into the right side of the green.  There is certainly more than one way to play that hole, even though it's not easy to make par.

[Peter Pallotta]

Given that someone who has played 1000+ courses (Mark) says the greens on the Black are over the top, and another very experienced golfer (Joel) wonders how Gil ever thought to build such greens at a resort and calls them a grind, this will seem (and may well be) a stupid question, but:

Are the greens good? Are they strategic, ie do they favour/reward certain approach angles and trajectories? And if so, are they - from those preferred spots - interesting and challenging and fun to try to read and to putt?

In short: if you set aside where the course is and the market it (ostensibly) is meant to serve and the experience of high handicappers, are the greens *well designed*?

Or do you think you *can't* set aside those things and still call anything 'well designed'?

Thanks

[MCirba]

I've struggled with the yips all year and I didn't 3 putt a single green on the Black.


I also birdied 2, 5, 17, and just missed a few others by a hair.  Played well and shot 77.


I have to wonder if The Old Course was opened in 2017 if we wouldn't be bitching about the huge, over the top greens, particularly on a windy site?


I found the Black to be a wide open playground.   Figure out how to make a score, no?


As far as Tom's original.question I always preferred the Blue over Red because I appreciate the pacing and variety of holes, the non-obviousness of the strategies, and the intersections and interjections of bunkers at critical places.   In contrast it seemed many of the easier holes on Red are grouped together early and the hard, long ones get a bit relentless on the back nine  of the Red. 


Without going into much more detail on the Black at the moment I'd say it likely won't photograph particularly well in the same way TOC doesn't.  There just isn't the visual drama that some love except perhaps on the three finishing holes.


10 rounds I'd go 4 Blue, 4 Black, 2 Red.

[Bill Brightly]

Cory, I thought the exact same about 13 right green. What a bizarre hole, and impossible putting surface.

We played the left green for the GOLFWEEK event, and I thought it was a pretty interesting hole to that green.  After putting out, we walked up over the right green to get to the next tee, and I did a bit of a double-take, wondering how a lot of players would be able to hold it.

Played the left green day one, really liked the hole. Pin on right green day two, hit great drive on right side of fairway leaving 90 yard approach to front right pin. Hit full sand wedge, nipped it perfectly, but was not sure i had enough to carry greenside bunker. I'm yelling get up and the caddy is yelling get down... The ball landed just over the trap, almost hit the flagstick and thats all I could see until I got up there. The ball came to rest on the last foot of the putting surface, just before it would have rolled another 20 yards or so down into a collection area. I managed to two putt but I remembering thinking: "WTF?"

[Tom_Doak]

I've struggled with the yips all year and I didn't 3 putt a single green on the Black.


I also birdied 2, 5, 17, and just missed a few others by a hair.  Played well and shot 77.


I have to wonder if The Old Course was opened in 2017 if we wouldn't be bitching about the huge, over the top greens, particularly on a windy site?

The answer to your last question is certainly yes, but that leaves open the question of whether the greens on the Black [or the Castle Course, or any other new course] are good, or whether they are over the top. 


I personally wouldn't make the call on that after one play [with rental clubs and an ugly modern putter, to boot].  There is a lot of really good stuff there; the question is whether there's too much of it, which is partly a matter of taste.  But it was obvious that some people were going to be turned off by the greens.  Lots of people have bitched about the greens contours on the Blue course, and the greens on the Black are certainly wilder than the Blue.

[Carl Rogers]

Reviewing the last remarks on this thread and many others, let me ask the rhetorical question:


How can the expectations of golfers be adjusted to accept slower green speeds or a wider range of green speeds from course to course?

[Steve Lang]

Hey Carl,  how're the joints doing?


In regard to your question... no way in the world can one address the fickle golfing destination clientele!!!  After all, how many opinions seem biased on how well the rater scored or didn't or got overwhelmed by the experience? 


The SS greens seemed slow the days we played... 

[Tom_Doak]

How can the expectations of golfers be adjusted to accept slower green speeds or a wider range of green speeds from course to course?

Carl:


My observation is that people give up their expectations when it's the only game in town.


When they go to Scotland or Ireland, most people adjust your expectations on green speeds and general conditioning down.  They have no trouble adapting to the speeds after one or two rounds, because they're pretty similar from one course to the next.


Likewise, when they go to Bandon for a few days.  Or to destinations in the Caribbean or Mexico, where pretty much every course uses the same grass and no one pushes it too hard.


But if you go to a place where a particular course maintains their greens really fast, then it's much much harder to adjust back the next day to another course where greens are slow.

[Jack Carney]

I vote for Red. Its kinda funny to say as the holes of the Red and Blue are intertwined but I do like the land better. As hard as the first hole is the second is just as easy so I give that a pass. The first hole I think of on the entire property is red 16 - very difficult but what a fun shot to hit well. I don't think i'm long enough for that front pin location but of four rounds I didn't see it up there. Reminded me a bit of RCD's ninth hole second shot; about the same length after a good drive and the "dunes" green right are similar in size.


I have not played the Black and from what i've heard that just OK. I would like to go back for another try but just to many to play but you never know.

[Ronald Montesano]

When a course/club greets me with "we have very challenging green surfaces, and we're trying to figure out a proper speed/height, at which the majority of golfers are able to appreciate the challenge and not engorge with frustration" I'm thrilled. It's customer appreciation at its finest, and it has happened (not those words, but the spirit) on occasion.


I think that Black could mow its greens higher than mature greens might handle, and gauge the reaction of golfers. Who complains about making birdies and eagles, long putts and chip-ins? No one that I know.

[Ryan Taylor]

I've played SS Red and Blue about five times each. I haven't played Black. Both have good short 4's, interesting 3's with variety and unbelievable par 5's. It's hard for me to pick a favorite so I put them head to head.

#1: Red / +1 Red
#2: Blue / AS
#3: Blue / +1 Blue
#4: Blue / +2 Blue
#5: Blue / +3 Blue
#6: Blue / +4 Blue
#7: Red / +3 Blue
#8: Red / +2 Blue
#9: Halved / +2 Blue
#10: Red / +1 Blue
#11: Red / AS
#12: Blue / +1 Blue
#13: Blue / +2 Blue
#14: Red / +1 Blue
#15: Red / AS
#16: Red / +1 Red
#17: Blue / AS
#18: Red / +1 Red

RED wins 1-up.

I was really surprised by the outcome. Before in depth review, I would have guessed that Red wins by #15 or so. Blue has a great stretch of holes from #2 - #7. Red may even have a better stretch from holes #7 - #11. My favorites are Blue #2 & #6 and Red #7 & #9. Can't wait to go back.

Given 10 rounds, how would you allocate your rounds? Please post your handicap when responding.

5-5 Blue/Red. Blue front nine is a blast to play but red finishes strong. 3 handicap.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()