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.


Paul Richards

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Golfweek's Classic List
« Reply #25 on: February 27, 2004, 10:13:39 PM »
Jaka:

You are a very astute man!

 :)

I am wondering about the same thing ...

 :-[ :-[
"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

Jim Franklin

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Golfweek's Classic List
« Reply #26 on: February 28, 2004, 10:48:47 AM »
Elkridge needs all of the help it can get. Apparently Silva is doing a wonderful job, but he had his work cut out. The changes to Elkridge in the 50s were painful. Even after Silva is finished, holes 6 & 7 still need to be blown up. They were added after by I am not sure, but do not fit the flow of the course at all. DC is in Florida for the week so that is why he has been absent.
Mr Hurricane

Tiger_Bernhardt

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Golfweek's Classic List
« Reply #27 on: February 28, 2004, 10:59:34 AM »
Tom H. Me thinks your GD claws are showing lol.

THuckaby2

Re:Golfweek's Classic List
« Reply #28 on: February 28, 2004, 11:51:56 AM »
Hell yes, JB!

It's that time of year... when a young man's fancy turns to ripping GW.  GD gets it the other 51 weeks, so allow me my fun.
 ;D

david h. carroll

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Golfweek's Classic List
« Reply #29 on: March 01, 2004, 10:55:47 AM »
Silva is just about fininshed with the work at Elkridge and it's looking fantastic.  THe poor weather has hurt the timing, but the crew is due back today to finish up the project.  The only part not fully restored/renovated is 6&7, but I imagine we'll be taking care of those two in short time once members see how out of place they are.  The Biarritz #13, is about 60 yards front to back, the punchbowl fifteen looks amazing and #9 Road will be a fantastic test.  All of the greens have been enlarged to original sizes and bunkering throughout the golf course is sharp.  Hurricane Isabel and the later wind storm allowed for a great deal of trees to be removed and the course should open on time.

Sorry to have been away for so long from the site, but it's been busy.  

BTW, was down in Jacksonville this past week and played Timuquana, Weed restoration of a 1923 (I think) Ross.  What a treat!!  So many options around the greens that I think I hit everthing from bunt putters to seven irons to L wedges to three woods.  Amazing fun!!

DC

Patrick_Mucci

Re:Golfweek's Classic List
« Reply #30 on: March 01, 2004, 11:10:13 AM »
DCarroll,

Did you get the feeling that you were playing a Donald Ross golf course ?

What were your favorite holes ?

I would imagine that the options you reference are probably confined to winter play.  In the summer, the growing season, I think many of the playing options are eliminated in Florida.

david h. carroll

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Golfweek's Classic List
« Reply #31 on: March 01, 2004, 11:28:46 AM »
Pat--I did, except for the fact that greens seemed a bit smaller than most Ross greens I've played.  I can see what you mean about the way the areas around the greens would play much differently in the summer as I'm sure the bermuda grain and the watering would take away a lot of the options.

I really like the short #3 (346 from the tips)...our group all hit irons down the middle and then proceeded to hit lousy wedges.  two in the front bunker, two over the green.  After the next shots, everyone had just exchanged positions, as two from behind green hit it over into the front bunker and the two in front buker hit it over the green into the swale...it brought a lot of laughter.  I really like the par fives as well...all very reachable but with tiny greens and slight doglegs...the almost double dogleg to the 4th, I think, with the pond left and front of the green was wonderful as it asked for a cut off the tee and then the angled green really fooled with yrdages...our group played the par fives miserably even though almost every time, we were long and middle of the fairway off the tee.  The visual aspect of the course was special as well...all day long, I had trouble believing a pin was where the pin sheet said it was and I continued to be fooled by some hazard placements.


A_Clay_Man

Re:Golfweek's Classic List
« Reply #32 on: March 01, 2004, 11:34:11 AM »
Paul Richards, I'd speculate that having the work done on the course this last year, will take time to be appreciated.

Scott_Burroughs

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Golfweek's Classic List
« Reply #33 on: March 01, 2004, 11:43:02 AM »
Paul,

Furthering Adam's comment, since much of the work was being done last year (with 5 holes closed at one point last fall), the work was still in progress and few have had a chance to see the finished product yet (is it finished?).  Several people here have mentioned that they will be in town in October, so I'll guess that Beverly will get it's share of visits this year.

David,

Welcome back.  Someone up there in Balmer has got to tell Cal to stop giving advice to A-Rod on his move to third.  Da Yankees are da enemies with all of the ammo - they don't need rifle lessons.
« Last Edit: March 01, 2004, 11:46:39 AM by Scott_Burroughs »

Wayne Wiggins, Jr.

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Golfweek's Classic List
« Reply #34 on: March 01, 2004, 04:58:31 PM »
Does anyone recall Aronomink's ranking last year?  The restoration has been widely applauded and I'm curious if the 56 spot is a big improvement.

Obviously, no one has been to Aronimink in the past couple years... how can this leading publication continue to  spell it incorrectly.  It's AronImink... not AronOmink.  Maybe, they've been visiting the wrong course all together?


Gerry B

Re:Golfweek's Classic List
« Reply #35 on: March 01, 2004, 09:28:45 PM »
Yale not being in the top 100 despite the uneven conditions is a joke. Great layout and variety of holes. The Biarritz hole and the 2 finishing holes are amazing -and plenty of other holes are great as well.Restore the course to its original glory and it would be in the top 20 in my book.

 >:(

Gerry B

Re:Golfweek's Classic List
« Reply #36 on: March 01, 2004, 09:30:56 PM »
I agree that Beverley is a great track -vastly underrated

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +2/-1
Re:Golfweek's Classic List
« Reply #37 on: March 02, 2004, 01:55:56 AM »
Shivas:

Your hypothetical situation is the case for quite a few courses, but I think it's something that Brad just has to let the panel work out for themselves over time.  If he makes the decision to count some votes and not others on certain courses, and not others, what sort of procedure is that?

Then again GOLFWEEK is based in Florida, isn't it?  Perhaps if Brad decides to stop dealing with the ballots the attorney general can step in and sort things out!

P.S.  Just my opinion ... there are way too many Seth Raynor courses in the Classic top 100.  You GOLFWEEK panelists need to get out and see more Ross and Tillinghast hidden gems.

Paul Richards

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Golfweek's Classic List
« Reply #38 on: March 02, 2004, 07:02:41 AM »
Adam and Scott:

The work at Beverly is 90% completed.  A few fairway bunkers need to be grassed and the cartpaths need to be covered (with the crushed granite, not asphalt - except on the big slopes).

I think Shivas is absolutely correct in his assessment.  A lot of "old" votes - when the course was overgrown and a bit worn, but still a highly regarded course (as high as #7 in state on Golf Digest's 1999 list) - however, anyone who saw it in 'transition' last year (the restoration has been a multi-year project) got the appreciation of just how strong this Ross design is - and I'm sure if you compared the votes of the past year to people's votes who hadn't been there for some time, you would see a marked difference, just as Shivas describes.

Unfortunately, Skokie also has suffered from this same problem.  

The question is how to give the raters 'credit' for playing a course but not penalize those courses that have undergone a major remodel?

"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

Nick_Ficorelli

Re:Golfweek's Classic List
« Reply #39 on: March 02, 2004, 08:52:26 AM »
Paul:
I'm pretty sure the word is now out on Beverly and my guess is  that ,like most restored classics, raters with seek it out in 2004.

david h. carroll

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Golfweek's Classic List
« Reply #40 on: March 02, 2004, 09:43:56 AM »
Scott--glad to be back...I dunno if you saw the Balto. Sun this past weekend, but they had a great pic of Earl Weaver offering Mazilli some sage advice ;)

JohnV

Re:Golfweek's Classic List
« Reply #41 on: March 02, 2004, 10:03:13 AM »
If I had a done a rating on Beverly (which I haven't) and I had heard that it had undergone major changes, I wouldn't vote on it again until I saw the changes.  I think that most raters feel this way.  In some cases the numbers might go up and in others (need I mention names) they might go down.  Fortunately this website helps a lot in informing us on the courses that are undergoing changes.

Mike_Cirba

Re:Golfweek's Classic List
« Reply #42 on: March 02, 2004, 10:30:30 AM »
Shivas;

What's Medinah looking like?  Any update?

Mike_Cirba

Re:Golfweek's Classic List
« Reply #43 on: March 02, 2004, 11:11:44 AM »
Shivas;

Does the course at least have a consistent visual theme now?  And, does it still look like a classic course, or more of a modern one?

W.H. Cosgrove

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Golfweek's Classic List
« Reply #44 on: March 02, 2004, 11:23:13 AM »
Shivas and Tom,  Brad and GW are attempting to produce a regular newsletter for exactly some of the information dissemination you are discussing.  Included in that is information on new courses seeking ratings, which has been a topic ridiculed by some in GCA.  

A damned if you do and damned if you don't situation if I ever saw one!

Paul Richards

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Golfweek's Classic List
« Reply #45 on: March 02, 2004, 09:43:34 PM »
John and Shivas:

you make a great point:

>If I had a done a rating on Beverly (which I haven't) and I had heard that it had undergone major changes, I wouldn't vote on it again until I saw the changes.  I think that most raters feel this way.  


Unfortunately, in this case, I don't think you are correct in your perceptions.  Many raters, like most golfers, like to say that they've played "X" number of the top courses.  Of course, things change over time, courses get restored or renovated, but it's not likely that many will journey back to a place they have already played, when there are so many more out there to see.

The question is how to give the raters 'credit' for seeing the courses, but not skew the total points because a bunch of old votes are still in there for a course that has been improved and is earning higher votes today.

How to do that?
"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

Paul Richards

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Golfweek's Classic List
« Reply #46 on: March 03, 2004, 09:20:44 PM »
I'm surprised no one has taken up the challenge to answer my question:



The question is how to give the raters 'credit' for seeing the courses, but not skew the total points because a bunch of old votes are still in there for a course that has been improved and is earning higher votes today.

How to do that?
"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

Gerry B

Re:Golfweek's Classic List
« Reply #47 on: March 03, 2004, 10:03:56 PM »
I have played Medinah #3 twice since the Rees Jones makeover. Definitely some  major improvements -in particular :

-the bunkering is much better

-tree removal to allow for more sunlight around some of the greens - don't worry -they left plenty of trees along the fairways to catch errant tee shots

-placing the 17th green back down by the water

- 18 is much improved -redan like green complex -with some great pin positions - big trouble if you roll off the back

-15 -is much tougher now - great green complex

the course is very long for us mortals - 7508 from the plates


In response to Tom Doak's comment re: overlooked Tillinghast and Ross courses, there is one Tillinghast course in Canada -Scarboro.
The course has held 4 Canadian Opens(the last one in 1963) -I was a member until last year (was my second golf club in Toronto) Some great holes, but the course needs a makeover -  the bunkers in particular(the greens are fantastic) but the membership don't seem to care. That is the main reason I left.

Would have loved to have Tom Doak do a restoration. There are some average holes but 8 -9 amazing ones as well. 3 of the best par 3's that you will find anywhere - in particular # 4 -a downhill 206 yard gem that Arnold Palmer said was one of his favorites anywhere.  A short course by todays standards, but a tough walk - very hilly.

A an added bonus they have a 19th hole (where bets are settled) - 138 yards  -with a ski slope back to front green that is usually mowed twice a day - remember Payne Stewart's putting horror on 18 at The Olympic Club at 1998 US Open?You get the picture.

Seth Raynor still rules in my opinion.

 ;)

Paul Richards

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Golfweek's Classic List
« Reply #48 on: March 03, 2004, 10:31:22 PM »
Gerry:

The thing with the makeover is that the course, on the tees and greens is much better.  Many trees have been removed, bunkers deepened, etc.  However, the thing that struck me is that NO trees seemed to have been removed FROM tee to green!  

So the tees are better, the greens are better, but you can still get a lot of fairway lies that are completely blocked by tree limbs.  

I'd love for Medinah to finish the job.  Remove a LOT of trees from tee to green and the course would be much, much better!

"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

Gerry B

Re:Golfweek's Classic List
« Reply #49 on: March 03, 2004, 11:18:16 PM »
Paul:

The trees are one of the main features of the course. Take out the Driver and take your chances. Because most of the holes are fairly straight forward coupled with the length, the course makes you decide -safe off the tee and then long approach shots or swing away. As i am not a long hitter - i am forced to hit driver on most holes. Hit the trees or end up in the rough and for me par becomes  a real challenge.
Remove the trees on the fairways in my opinion would make the course much easier and I do not think the members who just spent millions on the restoration(not to mention additional annual dues) would buy into this concept.

As an example, there are many trees that overhang the fairways at The Olympic Club Lakes Course - in particular on the front 9 - which makes the course very special in my opinion -  except of course the hamburgers at the half way house(lol)and the par 3 course across the road.

Medinah # 3 is a Championship course that has and will continue to hold majors. Bear in mind that there are 3 courses at the club -so you do not need to get tortured by playing # 3 every round if your game is in a bit of a slump.. Medinah #1 (used as a US Open Qualifier)also has some great holes -#9 might be the best Par 5 on all of the three courses(over 600 yards with an uphill approach shot over a pond) and 17 and 18 are great finishing holes - yes 18 is a par 3 but so are the finishing holes at Congressional and Eastlake.

gb

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back