News:

This discussion group is best enjoyed using Google Chrome, Firefox or Safari.

Pages: [1]

Paul Richards

  • Karma: +0/-0
Laurel Valley
« on: March 28, 2003, 11:14:26 AM »
Having heard some very positive things recently about Laurel Valley, I just wondered who has played it?  What are your thoughts on the course?

thanks. ;)
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:03 PM by -1 »
Logged
"Something has to change, otherwise the never-ending arms race that benefits only a few manufacturers will continue to lead to longer courses, narrower fairways, smaller greens, more rough, more expensive rounds, and other mechanisms that will leave golf's future in doubt." -  TFOG

Steve Lapper

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Laurel Valley
« Reply #1 on: March 28, 2003, 11:36:07 AM »
I've played it twice.

Very Plush, very Dick Wilson.

Effective uses of water as stategic hazards. It plays tough from the back, but much easier from up front. The clubhouse and amenities are first class and much of the membership comes from afar for periodic visits.

Not awe-inspiring by any means, but fun and arguably one of the better manicure jobs in Pennsylvania. The 9th hole or 18th are my favorites as they reallyt make the player think about the tee shots and 2nd shots to score or even save par.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
Logged
The conventional view serves to protect us from the painful job of thinking."--John Kenneth Galbraith

ClarkW

Re: Laurel Valley
« Reply #2 on: March 28, 2003, 12:27:39 PM »
Laurel Valley benefits greatly from the large corporate presence in their membership in terms of outings and entertainment. In somewhat of a switch, it appears that there is more play during the week than on the weekends. Significant input from local favorite Arnold Palmer also. Lots of tinkering with holes from year to year. Add a pond here. Move a green there. Flipflop par 4/5 on finishing hole.

I agree with slapper's assessment that the back tees turn it into a brute of a course. Especially the par 3s.

Extremely well manicured. I would prefer to see the club throw a little less water on the course and have it play a little firmer. As slapper indicates, "plush" is the key word.

Facilities are first class all the way. Setting is beautiful in the rolling wooded Laurel Highlands. All in all a wonderful experience-- just a little less water and less tinkering please.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
Logged

TEPaul

Re: Laurel Valley
« Reply #3 on: March 28, 2003, 06:25:08 PM »
I was at Laurel Valley last fall at the Pa Golf Association annual meeting some of which took place at Laurel and Rolling Rock. We had a choice of playing either course that day and I chose Rolling Rock and am very glad I did.

But we had lunch at Laurel and it certainly is a very beautiful club and the course is plush as mentioned above. However, those from Pittsburgh who were there, are members and know Laurel Valley well said that a lot of the original Wilson course has been changed---by Arnold Palmer, I believe.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
Logged

Paul Richards

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Laurel Valley
« Reply #4 on: April 21, 2003, 07:31:46 PM »
I can't believe no one else has been to Laurel Valley or knows anything about it!! :-[

Does Arnold Palmer own it?

 ???
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
Logged
"Something has to change, otherwise the never-ending arms race that benefits only a few manufacturers will continue to lead to longer courses, narrower fairways, smaller greens, more rough, more expensive rounds, and other mechanisms that will leave golf's future in doubt." -  TFOG

Matt_Ward

Re: Laurel Valley
« Reply #5 on: April 22, 2003, 08:57:25 AM »
Paul:

The issue with Laurel Valley is turning off the H20 -- the place is extremely L-U-S-H. When you have tee shots hitting and then backing up in middle of summer you have a major problem in terms of how the course should play. I truly believe that if a speck of brown ever came up the powers-that-be would rush in a mano-second and straighten it out pronto!

The layout has demands from the tips as others have explained, but I don't see much character with the course beyond the difficult quotient.

No doubt about the facilities as it's Corporate Alley for all the execs from the greater Pittsburgh area. Laurel Valley has plenty of brawn but oh so little in the character area. For my $$ I'd stay in Pittsburgh and trek to Oakmont, Fox Chapel, Pittsburgh Field Club for a better overall course. But, if you want the pomp and circumstance that goes to all who play Laurel Valley you'll be treated in a very, very first alcass manner.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
Logged

Dan Herrmann

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Laurel Valley
« Reply #6 on: March 29, 2009, 10:41:11 AM »
After watching the Bay Hill this weekend I got to thinking about LV and found this thead.

It's obvious that it was overwatered 6 years ago.  Have things there changed lately?
Logged

Tommy Williamsen

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Laurel Valley
« Reply #7 on: March 29, 2009, 03:23:59 PM »
Paul we had a discussion about LV last fall.  As with many courses there was some very good disagreement.  I like the course, regardless of the wet conditions.

http://golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,36414.0.html
Logged
Where there is no love, put love; there you will find love.
St. John of the Cross

"Deep within your soul-space is a magnificent cathedral where you are sweet beyond telling." Rumi

Matt_Ward

Re: Laurel Valley
« Reply #8 on: March 30, 2009, 09:54:23 AM »
Tommy, et al:

I'd love to know how people see LV as being THAT great a golf course -- especially one that would make the top 100 annually. For me the layout would be hard pressed to garner a top ten position in the Keystone State.

I see LV as being a playground for the well-to-do and as a result has had the opportunity to spread its name far and wide. When really examining the architecture that is there I don't see it being so worthy of such acclaim.

Be very much interested in being convinced otherwise.

Just one final note - the bar for Pennsy private golf is quite high.
Logged

mark chalfant

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Laurel Valley
« Reply #9 on: March 30, 2009, 04:13:48 PM »
Matt W.

I have never played Laurel Valley , but I truly like some of Wilson's work.  I was curious how L.V .would compre to Metro NYC layouts such as  Meadow Brook or Bedens Brook. I like Meadow,  quite a test of  driving  and  putting. Im less familiar with Bedens Brook   but I have been told its nicely bunkered and has some solid par fives.

thanks for  any comments/ comparisons
« Last Edit: March 30, 2009, 04:18:07 PM by mark chalfant »
Logged

mike_malone

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Laurel Valley
« Reply #10 on: March 30, 2009, 04:24:25 PM »
 I was seriously underwhelmed on my visit there. What stands out to those who like it?
Logged
AKA Mayday

Matt_Ward

Re: Laurel Valley
« Reply #11 on: March 30, 2009, 05:55:37 PM »
Mark:

The contributions of Dick Wilson are a matter of taste no doubt.

I personally like a few of his designs -- Pine Tree in FL, Meadowbrook in NY, NCR in OH.

Mark, I don't see the fuss about Laurel Valley. Like I said -- it represents a design style for the time era in which Wilson operated. The course is often way over-watered and you have large putting greens wioth really little to offer in terms of design appeal.

The bar for Pennsy private golf is quite high and I'll be very much interested in any person who wants to bite and defend the layout.

I like the other Wilson courses I mentioned -- but would not have any of them within my personal top 100.

Just goes to show you -- that a high profile membership in the right location can make a big difference.

Frankly, I see LV in the same league with a place like Nemacolin Woodlands in nearby Highlands, PA. A brawny layout with little in terms of design merit beyond the difficulty dimension.
Logged
Pages: [1]
Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back