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.


Mike Hendren

  • Karma: +0/-0
Soured on Sweetens
« on: March 12, 2021, 01:29:37 PM »
First a few disclaimers:  1) I'm fully aware that my opinion might be sophomoric and doesn't count for anything; 2) What Rob and others have accomplished at Sweeten's Cove is phenomenal;  3)  I like  hipsters, but I'm not one; and 4) I like a hearty debate provided it's civil. 


Also, I'm fully aware there are three things one should never do:  1) tug on Superman's cape; 2) spit into the wind; and 3) criticize Rustic Canyon on a golf course architecture website.  This thread likely adds a fourth, but so be it.


I played 27 holes at Sweeten's Cove on a gorgeous day Wednesday and left wondering why I thought it was cool and fun on my previous two visits.  I don't understand how it is considered "great" by so many people, particularly the erudite Golfweek panelists who have it at 60th on that publications Top 200 Modern list. 


Such a bold and perhaps contrarian statement deserves explanation so I'll give it a try.   First, it's an inherently difficult site to keep dry.  That's not necessarily problematic except the shaping and elevation of many greens  feature a low spot in front.  That element, notably at the 2nd, 3rd, 7th and 8th greens as well as right of the 6th green deters the ground game and yields a high concentration of divots. 


The ground game is further hampered by the height and steep angles on all sides of most of the pushed up greens.  The putter or bumped short iron (my favorite shot in golf from childhood) might be the default play of us mere mortals who couldn't kill a snake with a lob wedge but the greens are not receptive to this approach as any attempt to "get cute" and attempt to pitch or putt the ball close will likely yield an automatic ball return, often navigated through divots or alternatively a 30 feet come-backer for the first putt for the bolder stroke.   I suspect I saw close to 50 such shots trundle back to the laughing golfer over the course of 3 rounds.  It was amusing, but hardly fun. 


A relatively small percentage of most greens are pin-able.  In fact one can't help but notice how old cup cuts are generally clustered.  Other areas more often conspire to work the ball away from the hole and even off the green rather than providing utility to approach the hole via an alternate route. 


The left hand tier of the 8th hole simply doesn't work unless one can drop a dime from heaven.   This green faintly conjures fond memories of a biarritz but the two elevations are much too high and orienting the green at a sharp angle to the fairway eliminates the joy of watching the ball disappear and reappear as the approach is played down the length of the green. It is possible that the hole simply ran out of real estate due to the proximity of the 9th tee but to site a traditional biarritz left of the current 9th tee would have been delightful.  Similarly, the 9th hole would be truer to redan form if the tee was located well right in what is currently the 1st fairway.  The current orientation of the 9th renders it an aerial hole for most regardless of whether the green is pinned left or right.


I think the course has become a hipster haven because it caters to the bomber who can be left with very short approaches at the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th (front pin only) and 5th, particularly with the outstanding firm and fast fairways.  Those are half par holes for any lengthy hitter who also knows his way around a sand or lob wedge.  For such player the course offers a birdie fest and a low score unless one gets greedy at the 6th.  I'm not surprised the white belt crowd flocks to the course from far afield. 


I debated to make this post but am open to plenty of criticism so fire away.  Just to make sure I alienate everyone equally, this course feels like it made its debut in the perfect environment, not unlike our most recent president. In my opinion, neither is great, but the timing sure was right.


Respectfully,


Mike


« Last Edit: March 12, 2021, 01:33:38 PM by Michael H »
Two Corinthians walk into a bar ....

Tim Martin

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Soured on Sweetens
« Reply #1 on: March 12, 2021, 01:56:12 PM »
Mike-If I was storming the beach at Normandy I would want you on my flank. See you on the other side.

Dan_Callahan

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Soured on Sweetens
« Reply #2 on: March 12, 2021, 02:10:24 PM »
“I think the course has become a hipster haven because it caters to the bomber ...”

When did hipsters become bombers?
« Last Edit: March 12, 2021, 02:50:32 PM by Dan_Callahan »

John Emerson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Soured on Sweetens
« Reply #3 on: March 12, 2021, 02:40:08 PM »
I think SC is really solid and fun to play.  It is a good model for future courses.  The site is not well drained, but that doesn’t hinder my opinion in any way.  With that said, I do feel it’s a bit overhyped.
“There’s links golf, then everything else.”

Kalen Braley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Soured on Sweetens
« Reply #4 on: March 12, 2021, 02:49:00 PM »

“I think the course has become a hipster haven because it caters to the bomber ...”

When did hipsters become bombers?

Good question:

Hipsters as in these guys?





Or guys like this?
 

David Ober

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Soured on Sweetens
« Reply #5 on: March 12, 2021, 02:49:54 PM »
First a few disclaimers:  1) I'm fully aware that my opinion might be sophomoric and doesn't count for anything; 2) What Rob and others have accomplished at Sweeten's Cove is phenomenal;  3)  I like  hipsters, but I'm not one; and 4) I like a hearty debate provided it's civil. 


Also, I'm fully aware there are three things one should never do:  1) tug on Superman's cape; 2) spit into the wind; and 3) criticize Rustic Canyon on a golf course architecture website.  This thread likely adds a fourth, but so be it.


I played 27 holes at Sweeten's Cove on a gorgeous day Wednesday and left wondering why I thought it was cool and fun on my previous two visits.  I don't understand how it is considered "great" by so many people, particularly the erudite Golfweek panelists who have it at 60th on that publications Top 200 Modern list. 


Such a bold and perhaps contrarian statement deserves explanation so I'll give it a try.   First, it's an inherently difficult site to keep dry.  That's not necessarily problematic except the shaping and elevation of many greens  feature a low spot in front.  That element, notably at the 2nd, 3rd, 7th and 8th greens as well as right of the 6th green deters the ground game and yields a high concentration of divots. 


The ground game is further hampered by the height and steep angles on all sides of most of the pushed up greens.  The putter or bumped short iron (my favorite shot in golf from childhood) might be the default play of us mere mortals who couldn't kill a snake with a lob wedge but the greens are not receptive to this approach as any attempt to "get cute" and attempt to pitch or putt the ball close will likely yield an automatic ball return, often navigated through divots or alternatively a 30 feet come-backer for the first putt for the bolder stroke.   I suspect I saw close to 50 such shots trundle back to the laughing golfer over the course of 3 rounds.  It was amusing, but hardly fun. 


A relatively small percentage of most greens are pin-able.  In fact one can't help but notice how old cup cuts are generally clustered.  Other areas more often conspire to work the ball away from the hole and even off the green rather than providing utility to approach the hole via an alternate route. 


The left hand tier of the 8th hole simply doesn't work unless one can drop a dime from heaven.   This green faintly conjures fond memories of a biarritz but the two elevations are much too high and orienting the green at a sharp angle to the fairway eliminates the joy of watching the ball disappear and reappear as the approach is played down the length of the green. It is possible that the hole simply ran out of real estate due to the proximity of the 9th tee but to site a traditional biarritz left of the current 9th tee would have been delightful.  Similarly, the 9th hole would be truer to redan form if the tee was located well right in what is currently the 1st fairway.  The current orientation of the 9th renders it an aerial hole for most regardless of whether the green is pinned left or right.


I think the course has become a hipster haven because it caters to the bomber who can be left with very short approaches at the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th (front pin only) and 5th, particularly with the outstanding firm and fast fairways.  Those are half par holes for any lengthy hitter who also knows his way around a sand or lob wedge.  For such player the course offers a birdie fest and a low score unless one gets greedy at the 6th.  I'm not surprised the white belt crowd flocks to the course from far afield. 


I debated to make this post but am open to plenty of criticism so fire away.  Just to make sure I alienate everyone equally, this course feels like it made its debut in the perfect environment, not unlike our most recent president. In my opinion, neither is great, but the timing sure was right.


Respectfully,


Mike


Here's what I took from this entire post:


Wait, you don't like Rustic Canyon???  ;D

Mike Hendren

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Soured on Sweetens
« Reply #6 on: March 12, 2021, 03:23:41 PM »
I DO like Rustic Canyon - quite a bit.   I don't like having to head to the closet to don sackcloth and ashes, however if I do anything less than fawn all over it.  But that was years ago.


Mike
Two Corinthians walk into a bar ....

Peter Pallotta

Re: Soured on Sweetens
« Reply #7 on: March 12, 2021, 03:45:27 PM »
Mike - I thought that was an excellent post, one of the very best I've read here in a long time and a near-perfect "gca.com" post, with all the details and rationales and informed opinions one could want. So thanks for that.

For me, what's most interesting is your own wondering about why you once found SC so 'cool and fun' in the first place. I think that would be an fascinating discussion -- particularly because of the focus on such currently-very-popular-but-hard-to-define categories like "fun" and "cool". (Full disclosure: I dislike both terms quite a bit -- they are supposed to say 'everything' but actually say next to nothing.)
 
If/when you feel like it, I'd enjoy hearing more about why you think that course once captivated you as it did.
Peter
« Last Edit: March 12, 2021, 03:47:15 PM by Peter Pallotta »

Mike Hendren

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Soured on Sweetens
« Reply #8 on: March 12, 2021, 03:58:34 PM »
P2, Tim Wieman (a one time resident) once described Nashville as an "architectural wasteland."  Meaning golf of course.  So to have something new, innovative, accessible and affordable (then) 90 minutes away was pretty exciting.  I also love quirk - perhaps too much.  Sweeten's Cove is loaded with The WOW Factor and as Vince Gill sang "Everybody's ready for the next big thing."


Really that simple.  I felt like I got behind the make-up for the first time this week and saw the course in a different light. 


Let me be clear:  I highly recommend a day there for anyone on this site.


Mike
« Last Edit: March 12, 2021, 04:21:07 PM by Michael H »
Two Corinthians walk into a bar ....

David Ober

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Soured on Sweetens
« Reply #9 on: March 12, 2021, 04:13:08 PM »
I DO like Rustic Canyon - quite a bit.   I don't like having to head to the closet to don sackcloth and ashes, however if I do anything less than fawn all over it.  But that was years ago.


Mike


I mean, how could you not? It is, quite simply, the greatest public golf course in the history of the world.  ;D

Jim Sherma

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Soured on Sweetens
« Reply #10 on: March 12, 2021, 04:17:52 PM »
I think there is something to understanding courses after multiple plays compared to initial access. I've certainly had courses that I thought were wonderful at first. Once I played them repeatedly the initial interest faded out through a better understanding of the actual shots required and the results of the spread of outcomes. A lot of the visual wow factors become much less important through time.

Eric Smith

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Soured on Sweetens
« Reply #11 on: March 12, 2021, 04:22:56 PM »
I just want to say bravo on the flavorful thread title, Bogey.  ;D

Mike Hendren

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Soured on Sweetens
« Reply #12 on: March 12, 2021, 04:26:25 PM »
Big E, it was all downhill after that.  Hope you and the family are well.


Mike
Two Corinthians walk into a bar ....

Ben Malach

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Soured on Sweetens
« Reply #13 on: March 12, 2021, 04:30:35 PM »
I think Sweetens is a great example of how you market a modern golf course. The merch, the atmosphere, and the architecture all compliment each other beautifully. The key thing for me about Sweetens is that every hole has something for you to take a picture of or create a video of. This leads the course to be easily packaged and sent through Instagram or Twitter and reach a large number of non-traditional golfers. I don't know if this can be quantified but I think the modern obsession with overly bold contours and loud bunkering can be traced to everyone now having a camera in their bag or not but it feels that way here. I just hope that the lesson from Sweetens is more about the marketing model than the contours because I don't know if they work all the time.
@benmalach on Instagram and Twitter

John Kavanaugh

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Soured on Sweetens
« Reply #14 on: March 12, 2021, 04:39:16 PM »


I don't know if this can be quantified but I think the modern obsession with overly bold contours and loud bunkering can be traced to everyone now having a camera in their bag or not but it feels that way here. I just hope that the lesson from Sweetens is more about the marketing model than the contours because I don't know if they work all the time.


I sounded that alarm over 15 years ago. Few listened, no one cared.


Did Ran say he bought a drone?

David Ober

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Soured on Sweetens
« Reply #15 on: March 12, 2021, 04:49:00 PM »


I don't know if this can be quantified but I think the modern obsession with overly bold contours and loud bunkering can be traced to everyone now having a camera in their bag or not but it feels that way here. I just hope that the lesson from Sweetens is more about the marketing model than the contours because I don't know if they work all the time.


I sounded that alarm over 15 years ago. Few listened, no one cared.


Did Ran say he bought a drone?


Wow, I never thought about it like that. Very good point about the camera thing. And everyone also now has access to the Internet, where is super easy to find photography previously only available in boutique golf mags, etc.

John Kavanaugh

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Soured on Sweetens
« Reply #16 on: March 12, 2021, 04:52:15 PM »
Not to mention that the current golfer no longer has the patience to wait for one signature hole. A modern course needs no fewer than eight selphie posts.

Peter Pallotta

Re: Soured on Sweetens
« Reply #17 on: March 12, 2021, 04:56:00 PM »
Mike - thanks. Yes, I suppose that as you say "it's really that simple". But on the other hand, when a golf course debuts on a prestigious ranking list at 60th place in the Top 200, its 'make-up' and the 'wow factor' are obviously carrying a ,lot of weight with a lot of experts. Others can tell me if they think it's too much weight -- but as I say, when I read about a new course rocketing to the top of the lists because it's "fun" and/or "cool", I get suspicious.

And note: this isn't coming from a 'hater'. I want every golfer (including me) to play as much golf as they can and to enjoy it as much as possible, and I'm happy for any architect young or old who gets a chance to earn a living and build a golf course and be successful (regardless of whether the course turns out good or bad or whether I like it or not).

BUT: we're on a website dedicated to the "frank discussion of golf course *architecture*" -- and this thread is one of the rare ones that actually does just that. I wouldn't want to see it cut short out of a rush to parrot the conventional wisdom

« Last Edit: March 12, 2021, 04:57:50 PM by Peter Pallotta »

Michael Whitaker

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Soured on Sweetens
« Reply #18 on: March 12, 2021, 05:24:06 PM »
Bogie - as you say, SC is loaded with WOW factor... which is impressive for an inland course with no significant views. But, it seems for you the SC WOW factor does not wear well. I can see that. On repeated plays the uniqueness of the course might not be able to hold one's appreciation.


I think a good question for SC is how quickly, if ever, does the quirk become tiresome. I've only played the course on two occasions, so I'm still in the "Very Interested" mode with Sweetens. But, I can see where you are going with your comments if the uniqueness of the course becomes tiresome on repeated visits.


I'm not there with you... but, I can't say I couldn't feel the same as you after multiple visits. I hope I get the opportunity to test your theory.
"Solving the paradox of proportionality is the heart of golf architecture."  - Tom Doak (11/20/05)

John_Cullum

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Soured on Sweetens
« Reply #19 on: March 12, 2021, 05:24:54 PM »
obviously carrying a ,lot of weight with a lot of experts.


Experts! (Insert Audible chuckle)
"We finally beat Medicare. "

Joel_Stewart

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Soured on Sweetens
« Reply #20 on: March 12, 2021, 05:26:59 PM »
Go play Winter Park 9 and see if you have the same reaction.


I played WP9 and thought it was in a nice area, cheap to play but its dead flat and has very little architectural interest except some greens that slope?  Matt Ginela has been promoting it so every yahoo has been flocking to it.


Don't be afraid to go against the wind.  I need to go see SC.

Carl Rogers

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Soured on Sweetens
« Reply #21 on: March 12, 2021, 05:56:22 PM »
Have played 6 or 7 trips around SC.  I find it a bit tiresome but will go back play it when wife visits friends in Chattanooga.


I flat out do not care for the 4th hole.  A completely blind shot over wetlands & reeds to a green with a dozen or so pin placements and no hint where or how long the hole is playing that day.


Favorite hole is number 6, longish par 4, lake along the whole left side, bailout area and a more restrained green complex.


Hole 9 green is insane, too.
I decline to accept the end of man. ... William Faulkner

Jerry Kluger

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Soured on Sweetens
« Reply #22 on: March 12, 2021, 06:10:11 PM »
Mike:  I believe that you should be congratulated for playing 27 holes as you no doubt realized SC was not your cup of tea after 9 but you persisted on despite this.

Edward Glidewell

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Soured on Sweetens
« Reply #23 on: March 12, 2021, 06:46:56 PM »
Mike:  I believe that you should be congratulated for playing 27 holes as you no doubt realized SC was not your cup of tea after 9 but you persisted on despite this.


That wasn't my takeaway at all.


It didn't sound like he dislikes Sweetens; he just doesn't think it's as good as the accolades it's received.

John Kavanaugh

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Soured on Sweetens
« Reply #24 on: March 12, 2021, 07:28:46 PM »
Golfweek started ranking 9 hole courses in case someone wanted to get in a quick round before they went out of business.

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back