More Maidstone for Cirba

[Robert "Cliff" Stanfield]

As you requested, I just think the course is in my top5 US because it is a course that looks to be one that you would never tire of playing everyday.  Its the type of golf course I would want to join and play knowing that I was gonna have fun and not tire of the shots.  If you could take it and place it on year round site for golf and have a smaller clubhouse just for pints and food....then that would be my perfect club.

[Robert "Cliff" Stanfield]

[Mike_Cirba]

RCS;

Thank you!

I played there two autumns ago...we teed off at sunrise, played 18, had lunch, squeezed in another 18 playing the final hole in complete darkness.  

If the club had permitted us, I think we'd still be out there.  

[JakaB]

What is with the restoration of the bunker in the last pic...is that in house work.

[ChipOat]

No watering system; not lush; only the greens look immaculate; sort of like the Golden Age maintenance meld.

Hope they don't have any trouble attracting good members.

[James Edwards]

I have been to Maidstone and stood on the 17th tee and wondered, what exactly is the strategy?  What did the architect want us to do here.

It seems that the more you bite off, the tougher the approach?  which is a slightly confusing strategy.. don't you think?

...or was he trying to make the player, play as near to the road, as possible to give the best line in?  An interesting concept in safety?

Can someone enlighten me.  

[Lou_Duran]

Is the course as flat as the pictures make it look?

[James Edwards]

Yes Lou, extremely flat.

The most undulating part of the course is out by the duneland of the  short 14th.  other than that, there are almost no climbs.

[Matt_Ward]

Lou:

The bulk of the course is d-e-a-d flat save the exception of the brilliant dune holes in the middle of the course -- the
par-4 9th is truly one of the premier holes of its type and length one can play.

I am not an unabashed fan of Maidstone for a host of reasons -- being in the rarified air of the "Hamptons" certainly helps in my book with the club's standing. Maidstone does have its moments but they are not anywhere near the consistency of greatness as you will find with neighbors NGLA and SH.

I'm not saying it's not a good course but when people elevate it to top 50 status in the USA it's time for a reality check IMHO.

Lou -- given our shared feelings for Dallas National I would think you would immediately come to the conclusion that if Maidstone is truly within the top 50 than Dallas National would have to be no less than top 25 at the VERY worst.

I'd be very interested in getting your take on the courses on the east end of the Island.

[Mike_Cirba]

You guys are absolutely KILLING me.  

Barney...I must be losing my critical eye.  Perhaps I've been blinded after seeing the worst bunker "restoration" in history at Merion and now everything looks ok by contrast.  

A few years back there was some speculation that perhaps Rees Jones would be restoring bunkers at Maidstone.  I've tried to ignore that (wishing it to be untrue) because I don't believe their styles are compatible.  Is that what we're viewing?  Does anyone "in the know" know?

Matt/Lou;

I'll have to come out to see Dallas National.  If it's indeed better than Maidstone, you'll hear it from me honestly.

Until then, what are you guys smoking??  

[Lou_Duran]

Matt,

That is one area where much to my chagrin I have zero experience.  A summer visit is in the works, though, unfortunately, it may not be golf-intensive.  I do have the book ("America's Duneslands", I think) and George Bahto's wonderful "Evangilist of Golf" and they have me salivating at the prospect.

BTW, I do believe that Dallas National is in the top 25 modern.  However, as a rule, I don't like courses with tremendous amounts of elevation changes as much.  An ideal site in my opinion is one that is rolling, with generally gradual ascents and descents; a CPC as opposed to Pasatiempo or Paako-Ridge/Las Campanas vs. Black Mesa.

[Lou_Duran]

Mike,

I've never played Maidstone, though everything I read about it puts it high on my list of must-see.  And I haven't smoked or even drank much since college.

Knowing your reaction to River, and how you felt about Texas Star, I would be extremely surprised if you saw Dallas National in the same favorable light as I do.

FYI, many of the pros who've played DNGC just a couple of times are of the opinion that the greens are too difficult.  This also appears to be the concensus of short-hitting middle handicap players who depend on putting and chipping to keep them in the low to mid-80s.  An average putter at best, I think that overall and after some experience on them, the greens are fine.  How often do you hear about Fazio greens being too challenging?

[Mike_Cirba]

Lou;

You might be surprised.  I thought the River course was very good, but Cassique was an unexpected delight, even with the artificial qualities.  Texas Star just had some balls and throwback features (not all of them work successfully, admittedly) that I hardly expected to find at a muni in the middle of Texas.  

As far as the greens at DN, I think there's sometimes a difference between difficult/challenging and interesting/thought provoking.  Which would you say DN's are?  Or, D) all of the above?

Thanks.

[Lou_Duran]

As far as the greens at DN, I think there's sometimes a difference between difficult/challenging and interesting/thought provoking.  Which would you say DN's are?  Or, D) all of the above?

Mike,

Mostly interesting/thought provoking, though as with most new courses, some spot recontouring may be a good idea.  BTW being difficult/challenging or interesting/thought provoking is not mutually exclusive, or totally exhaustive for that matter.

With all due respect to Jeff Brauer whose work is typically outstanding, his greens at my home club (Great Southwest) are definitely difficult/challenging, while for me at least, not particularly interesting.  This is due in part to his client's marching orders which resulted in a lack of relatively level cuppable areas regardless of the length of shot that is called for (one of the most difficult greens is a 225 yard par three over water).  We have a number of fairly regular cup positions where at 8-10 on the stimp, you can take a bag of balls, and unless you make the putt, you can't keep it within 10' of the hole.  Even on 9, 14, and 16 at Augusta National, I've seen the pros putt as much as on a 90* angle and stop it within 5' below the hole.

DNGC has a few greens that are extremely difficult- 3-putt candidates if you're on the wrong spot- but, for the most part, these are holes where a very short iron is required on the approach.  I would classify DNGC greens as D), all of the above, closer to what we see at Augusta National (at slower speeds) than #18 during one of the early rounds at Olympic-Lake.

[TEPaul]

What makes anyone think the bunkers are being restored from the last photo?

J.J.S.E., you asked;

"I have been to Maidstone and stood on the 17th tee and wondered, what exactly is the strategy?  What did the architect want us to do here?"

Well, I don't really know that the architect wanted any golfer to do anything particular on this hole. This hole is really one of any golfer's choice particularly seeing as all goflers differ in length and accuracy a good deal.

For the shorter hitter on this hole his primary concern is to hit a decent enough drive to carry the water fronting the wide and somewhat diagonal fairway. I'll gurantee you there are a lot of golfers both good and bad who fail to do this for one reason or another. The shorter hitter might need to go way right onto the fairway and then he might have a long shot into a really small and intense target tucked very closely into the V of two roads!

The longer hitter can go much farther left but that gets to be a longer carry due to the diagonal carry across the water and the reeds to the left. The thing that most golfers don't know about the hole and fail to realize on the tee is the hazard (pond and reeds) cuts in very close on the left and close to the green on its left and that can't be seen at all or at all well from the tee.

The club solved that problem a little recently by cutting the reeds way down so now the green or at least the flag can just be seen from the tee way off to the left.

So what are the primary options for the good and long player on this hole. If he wants to get aggressive he can take a driver on a line just to the right of the green and hopefully come up almost within yards of the green and inline with it's opening. However, if he pulls his tee shot a little he can be in those reeds and in the lateral hazard very easily. The problem with that aggressive play for a long hitter is if he pushes his tee shot too much with a driver he can go over the fence onto or over the road and OB.

Or the good player can take a 3 wood or long iron and play out wider to the right but to the left of the fairway bunkering up near the fence and have nothing more than a W or SW in. Angle counts for a lot on this tee shot and approach shot because of a good greenside bunker left that's tricky to carry and stop the ball. Probably the ideal angle and distance of approach would be from about 30-70 yards from up near the fence. From there you're looking right into the gut of the small green and the trajectory options are multiple from there.

When the wind is blowing good golfers probably try to get their tee shots nearer the green than without wind as they can then keep their approach shot lower if they're nearer. It's really scary on this hole in strong wind to put an approach shot up in the air too much to that tiny dangerous green.

As I said on another thread the road right is a mere 6-7 steps from the right edge of the green and it's real easy to get a ball directly over that small target either into the wind or downwind!

The aiming points for most golfer on this hole are one of two very large houses that one can seen through the fairway that sit over to the left of the drive into the club.

It's a really great little hole where you can make plenty of pars, a good number of birdies and a great deal of "Others". The scoring spectrum has always been wide on this hole for everyone.

The other neat thing about the hole is the deceptive look of it from the tee compared to what it looks like when you get out on the fairway. If you hit a good drive just to the left of the fairway bunkers it seems from the tee that you have a fairly long approach but when you get out on the fairway it looks entirely different and you see you only have a very short approach.

With the reeds down now, again, the green can be seen off to the left from the tee now and that pulls a golfer's aim pyschologically and tends to screw tee shots up.

Being the 17th a lot of golfers tend to try some funny stuff on this hole and go awry easily. One time I came within about an inch of eagling this hole in the finals of the Maidstone Bowl to get me and my partner back to even only to lose the Bowl to a birdie in overtime sudden death on #1.

This is one great little short par 4 but I call it sort of "European amorphous"--it's just sort of there wedged into this interesting little landform bordered by pond, marsh, reeds, bunkering and fences and roads! And again, it's a Perry Maxwell green, small, interestingly shaped, contoured and oriented!

[Mike_Cirba]

Lou;

Thanks for a very interesting, detailed synopsis.  

I agree that not being able to stop a ball within 10 feet on several greens is not a good thing.  Have they heard of "maintenace meld"?  

I hope to get to DN before too long based on you and Matt's assessment.  

[JakaB]

TEPaul,

That was the best post on this site since Brad Klein tried to shut you guys up....why were the reeds a problem for the members...is the course starting to get too much outside play for its own good...it is not that the bunkers are being restored..they have been and by whom is the question.

[Matt_Ward]

Mike C:

Let's just say we agree to disagree on Maidstone. By the way Mike -- send me a packet of the wacci tobaci you've been inhaling regarding this luuuuuuuvfest over Maidstone!

Mike, Tom Fazio is rightly skewered at times for designing like-minded beautiful looking but often empty golf course from an architectural perspective.

However, there are also times when TF hits big time home runs with his efforts. Dallas National is most certainly one of
them IMHO -- it is above and beyond what exists in Texas -- it has simply moved the playing field in a very dynamic manner.

I also have credited TF's big time design with Glenwild in Park City, UT -- both DN and Glenwild are among the 2-3 best TF designed courses I have played and I have played my fair share of his designs throughout the USA.

Lou:

It would be a great to see someone who isn't enamored with the "look" of a course come east and sample the many unique and interesting layouts that exist in Northern NJ and through the east end of the Island and even on the other side of the Hudson.

Let me know if your travel plans ever come to fruition.

[TEPaul]

Barney:

I don't know that the bunkers have been restored. What the club did last year is to grow some serious fescue around and onto the surrounds of Maidstone's bunkering making the course play a lot harder for those who go awry. The bunkering out there may have been cleaned up some in-house in the last year or so but nothing that way really jumped out at me last year.

If one were to compare Maidstone to a house one very well might say there was some serious "deferred maintenance" issues out there at Maidstone in many ways including most all their bunkering. Maidstone's bunkering is very old and very evolutionary. Some say it's not maintained enough in a capital sort of way but frankly the way they maintain that course is just fine by me---it's the old fashioned way--basically they do just enough and leave it at that!

Barney, I'd love you to see Maidstone someday because for two courses basically without many trees it looks about as different from VN as a golf course could look, particularly in the way its maintained!

[TEPaul]

"Let's just say we agree to disagree on Maidstone.  By the way Mike -- send me a packet of the wacci tobaci you've been inhaling regarding this luuuuuuuvfest over Maidstone!"

Matt;

God knows how many times you've said that about Maidstone. Using the "Big World" theory of golf architecture it's sort of meaningless on your part to keep say that. Clearly you're into another type and style of golf architecture--one quite different than Maidstone for sure.

But Maidstone, even as different as it is from most courses in America in numerous ways is pretty much a very well known commodity in golf architecture in America and has been for eons. Whether you think it deserves to be where it is in the rankings is probably meaningless too--it's there, has been on and off for eons and probably will remain there. There're just far too many informed golfers out there who truly appreciate the course and what it is for you to be talking about people who like it being on wacky tabacky!  

[JakaB]

Is the bunker on 17 one big one or two little ones...this pic looks so much different than Rans.

[Matt_Ward]

TEPaul:

Take a chill pill amigo -- you know you're the one always barking about the world being such a big place and all the architecture that's out there is OK and yada, yada, yada.

Tom, I said (look again the eyes may be going) that Maidstone is a fine course -- I'm just not fawning over a layout that really is lite on a number of holes there. I never doubted for a moment the dunes holes. I know you don't care for ratings but I could care less whether you like them or not. I do.

I'm sorry I don't walk in lock step with you (a good thing indeed! ). The architecture of Maidstone doesn't cut it with me because when I see a course routinely rated among the top 50 and it fails to be that consistently good (unless the wind is blowing 50+ MPH) for the entire 18 holes I just think it's more of a deferential acknowledgement of the parts of the course rather than the total sum.

Tom -- look, you're enraptured with the place. Fine. I see it differently -- nothing more and nothing less. By the way the issue was about Maidstone and Dallas National. I've played both and weighed in with my thoughts. When you play Dallas National I'd like to see your thoughts too. Don't forget -- take that chill pill -- OK?

[TEPaul]

"TEPaul:
Take a chill pill amigo."

Matt:

Nope, no way! It is a great big world out there in golf architecture and there's necessarily a lot of opinions and my opinion about your opinion of Maidstone is your opinion is for shit! But of course there's nothing wrong with you having your 'for shit' opinion, in my opinion! In my opinion, you wouldn't know a fine old classic golf course if you tripped on it, but hey, it's a big world in architecture and somebody has to keep the glowing chatter up on the new over-architected Fazio golf courses. That my friend, is apparently something you believe should fall to you--and so be it. In 100 years some of Fazio's "Best of whatever for some year" will probably be upscale residential developments and Maidstone will probably be in the same place in the rankings it is now and probably look and play the same as it does now and has for eons.

"When you play Dallas National I'd like to see your thoughts too."

I doubt I'll be playing DN--I'm not real interested--so whether it's good, bad or indifferent, whether it's first, second, seventeenth or one hundred and seventh in the State of Texas I'll just take your word for it!

[Matt_Ward]

TEPaul:

Now come down partner -- you don't want to have a big one with all this weather do you now? If my opinion is worth sh*t please try to be a bit more polished in your responses -- GCA is a family station you know.

Yeah you're absolutely right Tom -- I most bow to your divine presence when it comes to knowing golf. Forgive me for even thinking that you could be the least bit open minded regarding differences of opinion. It just sooooooooooooooooooooo E-Z to pontificate rather than doing the field work and seeing the rising quality of many courses that exist in the USA.

Tom -- you're the guy who barked about Nicklaus and his recent design efforts, however, you have only played at best a few of them. Hello -- anybody home? How about the Tom Fazio comment you just made -- have you played some of his more recent efforts -- how would you know they are "over-architected?" Tom -- frankly, you're just barking from the cheap seats in deep left field.

Dallas National is a superb design effort by TF and given the ownership's desire I am quite confident it will be around for a long time to come. I guess it's easy to shoot off only about courses from the Main Line or the East End.

Tom, I can appreciate your desire not to get involved with rating courses but for those of us who enjoy the comparing and contrasting why spoil the party with your incessant moaning about them?

I commended Maidstone for being a fine golf course -- I just respectfully dissent that it merits the high place it occupies in American golf. I believe I've seen my fair share of courses to weigh in with my opinion. Now don't forget take that chill pill amigo.

[Lou_Duran]

TEP,

Spoken like a true northeastern patrician.  Were you wearing your blue blazer when typing this?  And then some wonder why southerners are suspicious of the reasons offered for not holding major events down here.  Pity that you do not care to broaden your horizons.