[John Mayhugh]

 Last week, Nigel Islam and I were trying to figure out where to meet and play a match. We were both intrigued by the new Steve Smyers course at IU. After all, how many new courses are being opened? I wasn’t all that thrilled with playing there, as my experience with Smyers hasn’t been real enjoyable (Wolf Run, Old Memorial). I tend to think of his his courses as difficult – not fun.
 
The little information I had seen about the course wasn’t doing much to change my mind. Articles touted the 7900 yards as being proof it could challenge college players, and this quote from IU’s golf coach didn’t help: “If you play within yourself, if you keep the ball in front of you, there is room to play golf.” Ouch.
 
Fortunately, Brian Ross posted some intriguing photos on this thread, so I was willing to give it a shot.
https://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,68462.msg1641244.html#msg1641244
 
Now, 18 holes later, I’m already trying to figure out when I will return. It was far from easy, but provided tremendous interest and fun. The property is hilly, and Smyers used a shocking amount of blindness or semi-blindness for a modern course. This, along with diagonal carries for tee shots and approaches served to create discomfort and confusion. (Note: hopefully the university will offer yardage books for purchase at some point).
 
Articles indicate 141 bunkers on the property, which I can believe. The bunkers are often in clusters, and the possibility of lies between the bunkers is probably more fearsome than many of the bunkers. Fairway bunkers are effectively used to challenge the line played off the tee, and greenside bunkers encourage approaches that vary with hole location. Unfortunately, the layout on the IU website doesn’t show the course as built. Smyers wisely left out bunkers on several holes – there was no need.
 
New course firmness made approaches more challenging, but I think the course works so much better if they can keep that level of firmness. We played from the white tees. It was a bit short (6136) but even hitting wedges often meant recoveries from behind the green. One quibble with the card layout and rating: 6136 from the whites is a bit short, but 6697 from the blues seems too long for me. Some sort of hybrid tees would be suitable for many players, I think.
 
There is tall grass around, but corridors are generous. We played behind a threesome that was simply awful, looking for balls just in front of the tees on many holes. I wouldn’t recommend playing there if you’re having trouble getting it airborne! But I think our threesome lost maybe four or five balls – not at all bad for a course as visually confusing as this one.
 
Descriptions of the holes from the course website:
http://thepfaucourse.com/hole-by-hole/
 
 
Some photos:
 
HOLE 1
Par 5  526 / 506 (note: hole yardages are from blue 6697 & white 6136)
 
Bunkering on the inside of a dogleg complicates the landing area for second shots.
IMG_8232 by john mayhugh, on Flickr
 
One of several squared-off greens viewed from right rear. One of the challenges with the new course is patchy rough around some of the greens, making for really difficult recoveries.
IMG_8234 by john mayhugh, on Flickr
 
 
 
HOLE 2
Par 4, 444 / 422
 
The hole doglegs left. Note the huge advantage of playing from the right side on the approach. An easy bounce-up shot rather than an intimidating carry.
 
IMG_8235 by john mayhugh, on Flickr
 
IMG_8236 by john mayhugh, on Flickr
 
 
 
HOLE 3
Par 3, 182 / 159
 
Hole plays downhill to a green with wide wings across the back. Big crease front right makes it difficult to get close to a front hole.
 
IMG_8237 by john mayhugh, on Flickr
 
 
 
HOLE 4
Par 4, 364 / 353
 
Par 4 that plays shorter than the yardage. Fairway is narrowed considerably by bunkers on each side, and the landing area isn’t visible from the tee. Fairway contours help with bouncing the ball in.
 
 IMG_8240 by john mayhugh, on Flickr
 
 
 
HOLE 5
Par 4, 321 / 294
 
Bunkerless, but a big decision to make. Nigel’s son almost hit it on the green, but as you can, getting it close to the pin is a different matter. Short grass behind the green too.
 
IMG_8242 by john mayhugh, on Flickr
IMG_8243 by john mayhugh, on Flickr
 
 
 
HOLE 6
Par 4, 418 / 391
 
Double dogleg. Correct line off the tee is important.
 
IMG_8243 by john mayhugh, on Flickr
 
 
 
HOLE 7
Par 3, 228 / 199
 
Significantly uphill to a massive green.
 
IMG_8248 by john mayhugh, on Flickr
 
 
 
HOLE 8
Par 4, 421 / 399
 
Hole doglegs right, making it tempting to shorten the hole from the tee. Approaching from the right isn’t much fun, though.
 
IMG_8250 by john mayhugh, on Flickr
 
 
 
Missed pics on a few holes, including the 9th.
 
 
HOLE 10
Par 4, 329 / 286
 
Smallest green on the course. Very good variety in green sizes/shapes.
 
IMG_8252 by john mayhugh, on Flickr
 
 
 
HOLE 11
Par 4, 406 / 357
This one played longer than the yardage suggested. Note all of the humps around the green, making for unpredictable bouces and shots.
 
 
IMG_8253 by john mayhugh, on Flickr
 
 
 
HOLE 12
Par 4, 483 / 438
 
The diagonal bunker is perfectly situated to mess with an indifferent long approach.
 
IMG_8254 by john mayhugh, on Flickr
 
 
 
HOLE 13
Par 5, 511 / 472
 
Not particularly attractive due to the hospital under construction in the background. The course is adjacent to campus, but other than this hole feels fairly isolated. The large mound on the right obscures the green and the desired landing area if laying up. Very Dye-like.
 
IMG_8255 by john mayhugh, on Flickr
 
IMG_8256 by john mayhugh, on Flickr
 
 
 
HOLE 14
Par 4, 361 / 347
 
If you were to show someone one hole to represent the course, this might be it. The green is at the far right of the photo. Players can take off as much as they want off the tee, but the bunkering hides the fairway. A good safe tee shot is about 240 from the whites in the direction of the cart (just left of the bunkers).
 
IMG_8257 by john mayhugh, on Flickr
 
 
Looking to the right, you can get a sense of the sort of lies you might find if misjudging (or executing) the carry.
 
IMG_8258 by john mayhugh, on Flickr
 
 
 
 
 
HOLE 17
Par 3, 164 / 148
 
The shortest par 3, and bunkerless. The humps and bumps short right seemed a milder version of something I remember from Southerndown.
 
IMG_8259 by john mayhugh, on Flickr
 
 
 
HOLE 18
Par 4, 387 / 356
 
Dogleg right to an uphill – and intimidating – green site. Looks like there is nowhere to land the ball.
 
IMG_8260 by john mayhugh, on Flickr
 
 
Wrong! This green is massive. And a fitting conclusion to the course.
 
IMG_8261 by john mayhugh, on Flickr
 
 
 
 
Sorry I left off a few holes. I’m likely to return soon, and will get photos that I missed then.
 
The reader can probably guess that I enjoyed the course. I am keen to return and try playing from different tees. For the average player, 6100 yards is probably enough course IF they can be convinced to play from there. Imprecise shots can result in difficult recoveries, but isn’t that part of the fun of golf? Someone playing conservatively and hitting decent shots won’t have any trouble playing this course, though scoring well may still be tough. Additionally, if you are a risk taker, you will find ample opportunity for that.
 
I can’t wait to see how this does in collegiate competition.

[Tommy Williamsen]

Thanks for the tour. I belonged to a Smyers course (Four Streams) outside DC for fifteen years. He uses a lot of bunkers and the green complexes are imaginative. I enjoy his courses a lot and this one appears to be a lot of fun.

[John Kavanaugh]

This is great news!!! Bloomington has a robust theater scene.

[Phil McDade]

John:


Thanks for this update and tour of the course. I've been watching this unfold as I'm now making several trips annually to Bloomington, where my son is enrolled in college (and lives about a mile from the course). Looks solid, and I agree the topography suggested the makings of a good course. The rap on the old one was that it was tight tight tight -- this looks much more wide open. I'm headed down to Bloomington shortly; I may try to stop by the clubhouse if for no other reason to pick up a scorecard.


John Kavanaugh -- true! Bloomington has a lot of robust scenes (he says while donning his Kilroy's hat )

[Criss Titschinger]

Played the new Pfau course with Steve Burrows for our Midwest Knockout match. I had no experience with the old IU course. My only other Smyers course was Wolf Run (NLE). In fact, this might have been the first time I played a truly brand new course in the year of its opening.

To me, this felt very much like a spiritual successor to Wolf Run given the bunkering and difficulty. Unlike at Wolf Run, I did not fear a potential lost ball on every shot. I felt the course was fairly wide open. It was interesting how many holes were blind from the middle tees, but were not completely blind from the tips. The 5th hole comes to mind. The green is partially visible from the tips, but the middle tees present a blind shot. As has been mentioned previously, this course has a surprising number of blind shots (from the middle tees) of a modern course. I typically have no problem with this. Without any type of guide, I certainly hit the wrong club and/or direction a few times.

I can't remember a time a course had me this disoriented. The 4th was a great example. It wasn't so much the myriad of fairway bunkers, most of which are blind from the middle tees. It was the way the fairway slanted against the land and how the tee set up that shot. Never felt comfortable over that tee shot, and I suppose that's the point.

I thought the greens were really good and interesting. There were a few where my first thought was, there's no way they could ever pin that area. Then I got closer to the green and realized the area was flatter than it appeared. I would liked to have spent more time at the greens giving them a study, but my game and back was failing me.

This leads me to my last point, and this is where my mid-handicap bias comes in. I thought this was a very good golf course. One that was certainly worth the travel. However, I have no interest in playing it again. It does not pass the play 18 and run back out test for me.

The front 9 must be fully traversed by all tees. I believe my front 9 commentary was, "It's a wonderful course to walk if you're playing from 4,000 yards" (tongue fully in cheek). I get why this is, but I have to assume the vast majority to players to this course will not be the IU Golf team. The golf team is certainly WHY this course was built. Things get better on the back 9, save that transition from 11 green to 12 tee, then 13 green to 14 tee.

The zoysia fairways were excellent, and the greens were certainly rolling. I hope they can maintain some level of that speed in the future. I wonder how the course will be maintained, with some mowing lines not quite 100% there and a lot of bunkers to maintain. I wonder how the native area will be grown out, and if it will be playable or immediate lost ball.

I have to believe the creative brief on this course was built a difficult and long course (with updated facilities) to recruit golf talent and host college tournaments. In that sense, the new course nails it.

[Cliff Hamm]

Thanks for the tour...totally agree that the gap in tees is too wide and therefore the need for 'hybrid'.  BUT why not just play the tee that makes the most sense for your game and decide hole to hole?  No, you cannot put your score in for handicap purposes but does it really matter?

[ward peyronnin]

Played there Friday and am very smitten. The bunkering style is old school and very solid. Loved the cornered green platforms and all the movement therein. Short walks from most greens to tees. Creative playing angles and use of the very rolling but acceptable severe terrain. Multiple kickpoints and every hole was unlike the previous and in a new direction. I kinda wish they would flip the nines; 10 would be a good starter and nine a great finish

Par threes were very dramatic. Great short two shot hole with one small bunker whose green was the primary defense. Wispy roughs allowed recovery but not a solid shot; hope they dont let it grow to junk. A very smartly executed playing field with endless ways to play it. Maybe a doak 7 altho i confess I am not that savvy with his scale. Well worth a trip.

[JLahrman]

Good to hear...on Brian's thread I was pessimistic about the course, and it still does seem to be very challenging. But it sounds like it was more playable than you expected, and I wasn't expecting it to be very playable. There are a lot of lousy golfers in Bloomington! Still not crazy about the higher price point for the town residents but it's a university course not a municipal course.


I'm a big fan of squared greens, but based on these pictures it looks like some are squared and some are not? Is that accurate and if so is it something you noticed? Often the squared look is something that we pick up more on photos and videos than when we're playing the course.

[Tommy Williamsen]

Having belonged to Smyers course and played a few of his, although not Wolf Run, the bunkering appears to be shallower than his other courses. Some of the clusters of bunkers, however are very Smyers like.

[David Wuthrich]

Tommy, you are correct!

[Mike Nuzzo]

cool to see some green sites working with the property, not fighting it.
peace

[PCCraig]

Looks great in these photos. That 4th green looks amazing.

[Jason Thurman]

I got to play the Pfau yesterday with Steve Burrows in our Midwest GCA Knockout match.


The Pfau's balance is similar to Wolf Run's: it's an artistically wonderful golf course with very attractive shaping and texture, loaded with interesting shots, and difficult as all hell.


Forget the native cut, which is in play for very offline shots but avoidable with decent swings. To me, the Pfau's more notable attribute is the sheer difficulty of the primary rough. It's long, thick, and full of broken ground and funky lies between bunkers. True "rough." This course places as strong a premium on driving accuracy as any that I can think of off the top of my head.


As others have noted, the course plays firm. I don't have enough experience playing new courses to know whether it's "new-course firm" or whether that firmness is more reflective of an intended long-term maintenance meld. But it's a maddening joy to play a course in the Midwest where even a lob wedge played from zoysia needs to be crisply struck to stop within 15 feet of where it lands.


The green contours themselves have a hand to play in that as well. The course has a lot of variety on this front. Criss' review calls out something I noticed too - from the fairway, the green slopes look dramatic. Up close, they look a little tamer. Then you hit a putt, and realize things might not be quite as tame as you thought.


Even in the 16 or so hours since I played it, my opinion of the course has bounced around. On one hand, it's really hard. And it's easy to get caught up looking backwards and go "this is ridiculous look how far back that tee is!" But then, it's so loaded with attractive holes and shots, and the setting is fabulous.


The course's overall quality probably comes down to the greens. You know how at a place like Crystal Downs every green feels like EXACTLY the right green to fit the hole that leads to it? After one round at the Pfau, my thought is more that every green feels like one more layer of challenge added to the hole that precedes it. The thing that might hold this course back from being quite as elite as it looks, artistically, is that I'm just not sure it brings the Easter Eggs for the smart player who knows the contours and can use them to his advantage. It might be almost entirely about avoiding getting screwed by the contours. Which I can appreciate as an element of a stern test, but the very best golf courses give savvy players something to use to their advantage every now and then even as they shrug off almost-but-not-quite-good shots.


Nevertheless, it's a stellar addition to Indiana's very strong top-tier of public golf courses. It certainly fulfills its marching orders to deliver a really attractive championship-level test. I hope to return soon as a player (note to self: play the white tees!) and I'd also love to attend a tournament there and see it in action.


Also, I'll note that I didn't play the last two holes as an incredibly torrential rainstorm smashed us starting about 170 yards from 16 green. But it turns out that a really great way to see green contours without putting on them is to watch streams emerge on them in real-time as you drive past.

[Jason Thurman]

I want to elaborate a bit on the "Do the greens fit the holes?" question, and realized Mayhugh's photos set up a few case studies on that front. So while I sit through a meeting that could've been an e-mail...

HOLE 2
Par 4, 444 / 422
 
The hole doglegs left. Note the huge advantage of playing from the right side on the approach. An easy bounce-up shot rather than an intimidating carry.
 
IMG_8235 by john mayhugh, on Flickr
 
IMG_8236 by john mayhugh, on Flickr

I get that, in theory, an approach from the right side opens up a better angle than an approach from the left. But...

• [size=78%]The hole is heavily bunkered down the left side, and balls hit down the middle feed hard toward sand and broken ground, so the ideal miss is a little to the right off the tee. I pulled off that ideal miss, finishing a yard into the rough with 175 left for my approach to a right-side pin. And from there... well, there wasn't really any way to get the ball on the green. Maybe a snap hook would've worked. I hit about the best approach I could've hit, landed just short right of the green, and ran through the green into a bunker long. Everyone in our group, actually, ran through the right side and into rough/bunkers. Even from the fairway, with the course's firmness, I would've had to land front edge to hold the green. Downwind from the rough, no chance. The second pic above shows the pitch shot for a player who bails right on their approach, but it's not a realistic approach angle for a GIR unless you drive it 400 yards. This is an example of a hole where some contours that could feed a bouncing ball from the right toward the putting surface would make things a little more interesting for the average player in my estimation, without diminishing the college kids' challenge.[/size]

HOLE 4
Par 4, 364 / 353
 
Par 4 that plays shorter than the yardage. Fairway is narrowed considerably by bunkers on each side, and the landing area isn’t visible from the tee. Fairway contours help with bouncing the ball in.
 
 IMG_8240 by john mayhugh, on Flickr

Coming out of the left rough on my approach from a very similar angle to this photo, I wasn't going to be able to stop it and spin it. So I played a flighted wedge, just left of the green, hoping it would feed down (I hit it where I wanted, but it was like a putt that never takes the break and I ran into the bunker left). There's a way to run a ball up the left, for sure. But based on yesterday's experience, it's not a "throw it out 5 feet left of the green, let it feed down" shot. It's more of a "hit it five feet inside the left edge of the green, and it'll feed to the center" shot. Which is perfectly reasonable and fair, but it should be noted that the weaker player using the ground contours actually has a smaller target than the strong player who can fly it onto the putting surface and a lot can go wrong if he misses his target by just a little.

HOLE 5
Par 4, 321 / 294
 
Bunkerless, but a big decision to make. Nigel’s son almost hit it on the green, but as you can, getting it close to the pin is a different matter. Short grass behind the green too.
 
IMG_8242 by john mayhugh, on Flickr
IMG_8243 by john mayhugh, on Flickr

What a wild green this is. Not pictured above is the runoff area behind the green, most of which slopes almost toward the back once you get past that big ridge. That swale front right is some real Valley of Sin-type stuff, and very flattened in the photos above. I really like this short 4 as the type of hole where just about anything can happen, and this green drives the action, although it's another green complex that offers all punches, no hugs.
 

HOLE 8
Par 4, 421 / 399
 
Hole doglegs right, making it tempting to shorten the hole from the tee. Approaching from the right isn’t much fun, though.
 
IMG_8250 by john mayhugh, on Flickr

Another hole where I (eventually) hit my approach from a very similar angle to the photo above, to a pin tucked a little further right. And as I go through these pics, I suddenly realize that I hit a lot of really accurate shots yesterday! The results were hit and miss though. I played my approach almost dead online with the pin above, taking a slightly conservative line that I expected to find something like the middle of the green. But yesterday's pin was tucked on a really tiny, shallow back-right lobe of the green. Accessing that lobe is for people with scholarships, and even the middle of the green is tough! The effective green width is basically exactly what you see above, with a lot less surface to the right than you might anticipate. A well-played ball to the pin pictured above still needs to be played at the middle of the putting surface visible above, a solid 5-10 yards left of the flag, and it's a pretty small target although this green did look like it would feed a ball a little to the right after it lands.

HOLE 12
Par 4, 483 / 438
 
The diagonal bunker is perfectly situated to mess with an indifferent long approach.
 
IMG_8254 by john mayhugh, on Flickr

Our group had a couple run-up shots on this hole that sorta worked. And John's right about that right-side bunker. There's about 45 yards of room beyond it, and you really need to challenge it to have a running ball feed into the green and hold. So it creates a lot of interest on that approach, but it's not going to be in play for many strong players so it really only adds that challenge for the average player (which is hard to accept... because I was in it yesterday).


Of course, that's not necessarily a bad thing. Average players need interest! But the hole would be a lot more accommodating if that bunker was shifted 20 yards left, where it would almost outline the ideal route to the average player as opposed to adding intimidation and challenge to that ideal route.
 

HOLE 13
Par 5, 511 / 472
 
Not particularly attractive due to the hospital under construction in the background. The course is adjacent to campus, but other than this hole feels fairly isolated. The large mound on the right obscures the green and the desired landing area if laying up. Very Dye-like.
 
IMG_8255 by john mayhugh, on Flickr



IMG_8256 by john mayhugh, on Flickr
 [/size]

This hole and green reminded me of Wolf Run's 17th in a lot of ways. That tabletop green is a mean challenge to hold, even with a 55 yard wedge earned after a good second shot. It'll challenge the hell out of the Tiger looking to reach in two, but the pin above is really a pretty far right one, and it's a shallow surface. So approaching from even a few yards left of the angle shown above becomes really tough as it's basically a ticklish pitch that needs to fly onto the surface, carrying the bunker fronting in most cases, but without much to help stop the shot once it lands.


But all that dictates a really interesting second shot, also shown above in John's first photo of this hole. My mistake on the second shot was that I sorta hugged the bunkers left, where I really should've gone over the mound that obscures the view of the layup area. The angle is much better from that right side as in the photo above, but it's still a tough approach to a small and demanding target.
All of that is just to illustrate the tricky balance of this course. It's loaded with interesting holes and shots, but they're also really demanding throughout. There are pros and cons to that, and final judgment will be in the eye of the beholder. I do think the punishment is a little excessive for the weaker player at times, though, and I'm not sure that it always had to be quite so stern as there were places where college kids could've still been challenged while allowing the alum to have a pretty decent afternoon too.

[Nigel Islam]

Jason,


I feel good that I got to play the course early on before the rough really grew in. It has only gotten more challenging since last summer.

[John Mayhugh]

I've not been back this year, but rough in my area has been a royal pain. I don't mind the impact on my score, but detest spending time trying to find balls.

[Tommy Williamsen]

The shot into 18 green looks like number 2 at Pine Valley.

[Jason Thurman]

Nigel, I'm assuming you've been back. If so, has the maturation of the rough changed your impressions of the course's overall playability? And has the firmness of the course overall changed? I don't know the difference between "new course firm" and "now it's grown in and still firm" but I was impressed with the way the ball bounced and rolled even on not-too-tight zoysia, and especially with how it released on greens.


I look at some of those bunker clusters and wonder how easy it's going to be to maintain primary rough between them. I've got to think it's gonna be tough to mow and control turf around them, but maybe they're more management-friendly than they appear.


I don't know. Like Wolf Run, I come away from the Pfau impressed with its attractiveness and how full of compelling shots and holes it is, but wondering if it REALLY needed to be quite this tough. It seems like a lot of yardage and funky bunkering to maintain. And I know college players are good and hit it a really long way, but I've also seen their tournament scores. You don't need an 8000 yard course with rather tight fairways bordered by brutal rough and bunkering to challenge them, so I just come away questioning whether this might be just a little more over the top than it needed to be. It also felt like a lot of elevated greens that could be tough for spectator viewing when tournaments do come to town... although I hope to attend one sooner or later and be proven wrong.


Tommy, your post echoes what Steve said as we hauled ass through that torrential storm on the way by. And you can't really see it from the photo in John's OP, but he also pegged 7 as sort of a mirrored version of Pine Valley's 5th without the water. I wouldn't know personally, but from photos I see a little resemblance.

[JJShanley]

I look forward to visiting Pfau on my next visit to Indiana!


It does appear that the two courses at Purdue have some competition for the title of "#2 University-run Course in Indiana." (While I enjoyed my one round at Zollner, it would probably sit at #5.) Culver, which I have not played, may very well be excellent, but it is not a university. Rudy was, however, offsides. Awful movie as well.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()