Golf Club Atlas
GolfClubAtlas.com => Golf Course Architecture Discussion Group => Topic started by: hick on April 03, 2003, 11:58:33 AM
-
Does anyone know why the Ranch Is in the top ten in Massachusetts and not Taconic, The Orchards( Womans Open 2004), Or Essex County. ??? ???
-
That's top 15, hick.
I also see where The International in Bolton (didn't that course used to be about 8,000 yards?) finished 8th, ahead of Charles River at 13.
Can anyone discuss their comparative merits?
-
For all those who love Massachusetts golf I have to ask this:
How does Crumpin-Fox in Bernardston not get rated at all? The course is simply a grand design by Roger Rulewich and has been a former mainstay in nearly all ratings that come from the Bay State.
Mike C:
The International is best played from sensible tees ::) (hard to believe I'm saying this, huh?) but the course is not as diverse or architecturally sound as Essex County, The Orchards or even Taconic. In the same breath that doesn't mean I would automatically include all of those courses in my personal top 15 for Mass -- I just know that Crumpin Fox would get at least one of those spots though.
-
Ditto on New Seabury, no way that course is #4 in the state.
I note that the International course that was ranked was Fazio's recent effort there, not the 28,987 yard RTJ one.
-
Sean;
Thanks for the clarification. I didn't think the original's reputation was all that renowned, even among the locals.
-
Mike - did you look at the Nebraska rankings? Jeez, I hate to speak ill of my brethren, but those seem to be WAY off. Our common fave is #1, but Wild Horse way down at 6 and no Bayside? Obviously I don't know much about NE golf, but I know the others would have to be damn good to be above these two... strange.
Your state seems about right to me, from what I know... maybe switch Lehigh and Saucon, and I'm sure you or redanman would have lots of other changes, but at first glance it looks pretty correct...
Same goes for CA, really. Obviously I believe Rustic and Barona need to fit in somewhere, and I have no idea what Shady Canyon is, but for the most part it seems about right...
TH
-
Tom;
Yeah, generally I think the PA list is good with some degree of quibbling.
For instance, I'm thrilled to see Huntingdon Valley get some due, moving up from 11 to 5. A GD rater I was paired with there last summer asked afterwards, "can you tell me why this course is not in the Top 100??" I couldn't give him a good answer, myself.
Haven't played Laurel Valley, but the restored Aronimink is good and tough.
Not sure how Philly CC dropped from 9 to 12, after a FANTASTIC renovation done mostly inhouse with Ron Forse's consultation.
How the forest that is Manufacturers jumped up from 21 to 13 is beyond me...I think it's wayyyy overrated, on the GW list too.
Stonewall is too low, by a LOT.
I haven't played it, but I do need to get to Olde Stonewall. If it's actually better than Doak's Stonewall though, I'll eat my hat and the wrap-around shades.
Philly Cricket also jumped forward quite a few spots, and I'm not sure i understand the basis for that one. Neither do I understand the significant drop of Moselem Springs, which I think is a fine course with some excellent greens.
Lookaway doesn't deserve to be in the top 50 in PA, frankly.
As far as the Nebraska list, was that wheat growing in those fields out there, or another herb?
-
Great stuff, Mike.
What the PA list hammers home once again is the incredible depth your state has in great golf courses. I'd say a list of those NOT included would still be damn good, wouldn't it?
Of course you do know I'm going to disavow ever saying this if necessary some day. ;)
TH
-
Mike -
Maybe Philly Cricket garnered some attention because of its new 18? (i.e. more people visited the course to see the Militia Hill course, which produced a better rating for Flourtown/Wissahickon 18?). I think it is a great course, although kind of a mixed bag. I think its rating is probably comfortable where it it.
My sense is that Huntsville is an unfair placeholder, and will likely continue its fall in subsequent rankings
Laurel Valley doesn't belong as high as it is. Heck, you could probably swap Philly CC with it.
I would swap in Great Bear for Hartefeld, or Lookaway (haven't played).
What the heck is SV (Grace) doing in there?
Fox Chapel is too low, and I would have thought it would have benefitted from Silva's restoration and the added publicity of the Curtis Cup, not suffered.
-
Mike C:
Save the hat -- Olde Stonewall is not superior to Stonewall -- anyone saying such a thing needs a few days in the rubber room.
Regarding Lookaway -- 100% with you Mike. If the course were to get any award it has to be the creative routing with the "U" turn you make on the front side. Interesting stuff, huh? I hope all anti Rees Jones fans see this coming from me.
Couple of other points on Pennsy --
Can someone please explain to me the constant need to thump the qualities of Saucon Valley. This course refuses to die -- it is literally one of the most overrated designs that exists. Minus a few holes on the Old I just shake my head and wonder how this facility still gets the votes that it does. I guess it must be me. ;D
Laurel Valley is a good Dick Wilson design, but it gets too much mileage being near AP's home turf and for my $$ the layout is always overwatered and is a long boring slog. It doesn't hurt the course that corporate alley frequents the place with clients.
Mike, it's too bad that Great Bear was not mentioned for a top 25 berth. Here you have a course that is just as good as Huntsville and yet gets little awareness. Be interested in your comments.
A few last comments -- how does Fox Chapel get bumped so low? Here you have a supreme classic style course from the Golden Age and it gets pushed thaaaaat low on the totem pole.
Can someone tell me if The Golf Course at Glen Mills really deserves a spot in the top 25 when Mystic Rock (I know Mike your favorite course ;D) doesn't make it?
-
Sean;
Believe it or not, I'd agree with EVERY SINGLE COMMENT you just made, with the caveat that I haven't played Laurel Valley or Fox Chapel and therefore can't concur but I do sense you're right on based on television viewing of each!
This must be the first time in GCA history that we've been totally in agreement! I see you're coming around! ;) ;D
Great Bear is a really good, underrated Nicklaus course, and is much better than either Hartefeld or Lookaway (and others).
Huntsville is a good course on a great piece of land if you catch my drift. How does one spell M I S S E D opportunity?
-
Matt;
The course at Glen Mills is a mystery to me. The front nine is really good, but the back nine is sandwiched between a steep hillside and wetlands, and is just awkward and contrived.
How it has gotten such high rating in all publications is beyond me. Of course, we agree to disagree that Mystic Rock should take it's place.
How about we just settle on Great Bear as the best public course in the state? :)
As far as Saucon Valley, it's certainly inoffensive.
-
Mike C:
Cut it out -- I'm still trying to get in agreement the
following people -- you, me, Pat, Huck and Tom MacWood. Guess it would be easier winning the Power Ball -- right?
All kidding aside -- Mike have you checked out the Jersey listing? ACCC is rated #5 -- a solid Doak restoration indeed and a ton of $$ pumped in from Park Place Entertainment, but no way #5 -- more like at best a top 20 position.
Did you see that beyond Olde York GD also listed Running Deer high in the pecking order?
And, I'm still waiting for someone to explain why Twisted Dune never gets a blurb on it. ;)
-
Mike,
I suspect the conclusions you and I draw are often closer than you would have them, the only difference, of course, is that we arrive at them in entirely different ways.
I have not played Applebrook, but given everybody's raves here, is it surprising to you that it was left off? I hope to play this spring.
-
Sean;
Oh lord!
How could I have forgotten about Inniscrone & Applebrook??
Supplant either of them about where Manufacturers and Saucon Valley Grace fall and now we're starting to talk...
-
Matt;
I still haven't seen Doak's work at ACCC so it's tough to comment on how much it's been improved. I do know that the GD rater I played with at Huntingdon raved about it.
Haven't played Olde York either, but any Jersey list with Jasna Polana in the top 20 is immediately suspect! ;)
Not surprisingly given the criteria, both Pine Hill and Running Deer are higher ranked than Twisted Dune, but I know where I'll continue to send people who ask about where to find great golf in south Jersey.
-
For those who don't have the list, here it is:
Massachusetts
1. The Country Club (Clyde/Squirrel), Brookline [1]*
2. Kittansett C., Marion [2]*
3. Salem C.C., Peabody [3]*
4. New Seabury Resort (Blue), Mashpee [7]*
5. Myopia Hunt C., S. Hamilton [5]*
6. Nantucket G.C., Siasconset [4]*
7. Sankaty Head G.C., Siasconset [9]*
8. International G.C. (Oaks), Bolton.
9. Hyannisport C., Hyannis Port.
10. Eastward Ho! C.C., Chatham [10]*
11. Charles River C.C., Newton C.*
12. Oyster Harbors C., Osterville [13]*
13. The Ranch G.C., Southwick.L
14. Brae Burn C.C., W. Newton [8]*
15. Cape Cod National G.C., Brewster [6]
-
Now for my comments, there's a lot of courses I haven't played on the list, so I will reserve my comments to those I've played.
In short, the placement of New Seabury and the International, regardless of where they are on the list are travesties!
While I enjoyed playing New Seabury and found the International fun for the charity scramble, neither of them are top class and would push Essex County from the list.
As usual, and unlike the GolfWeek list which has much greater integrity, GolfDigest seems to be pandering to the "popular" tastes (resort and novelty courses) rather than the truly best courses.
-
Just so that everyone is clear...
The course that shows up as #8 on the MA list is the NEW course at the International, called the Oaks. It was designed by Tom Fazio, and has been open for a year or two.
The OLD course at the International is now called "the Pines". The design is credited to Geoffrey Cornish, and a redesign (in 1972) is credited to Robert Trent Jones. This is the course that can be stretched to 8,325 yards, and is in the Guiness Book of World Records as the longest course in the world.
-
Finally, a thread that I really can chime in on...here goes...
1. I dont think New Seabury should be that hight, it is a nice course in a great setting, but I dunno if the renovations have changed the fact that it is a pretty benign cape-style course.
2. Myopia as #5, perfect. Hoever, Essex should be #4 in front of it. There are no weak holes on the course, and the new maintenance program promoting firm and fast should be commended.
3. The Ranch should not be listed here. There is a show called the New England Golf Journal or something (maybe affiliated with the magazine of the same name) on one of the Boston stations on which I saw a tour of the Ranch. I thought, wow the course must be great, until I noticed that the show advertised the same publicity for any other course calling their number to be featured. This knocked the course down a bit in my mind. I admittedly have not played the course, but it is advertised to be built down old ski slopes or something, and the video shown did not do the course must justice in terms of scaling.
4. Taconic should no doubt be in the top ten. It has conditioning, history, ambiance, and all the rest. I at least beats Seabury hands down.
Thats about it for now.
Brad
-
I played The Ranch twice last year. I liked it, but not as much as Red Tail, which I played 5 or 6 times.
The Ranch features two par 5s that are very similar, #9 and #16. They both appear to be played down old ski slopes; #16 is actually called "Ski Slope" in the course-marketing parlance of our times. #9 played 502 yards the first time I played it, and I hit it with a driver and 8-iron. I'm not against short par 5s; they just felt a little gimmicky to me. Not to mention a little slow; since you can't see your drives land, and since both fairways are canted to one side quite a bit, it can take a while to find your tee shot.
I must say, however, that I liked the course better than Ron Whitten did:
http://www.golfdigest.com/courses/critic/index.ssf?/courses/critic/ranchgolfclub.html
Yikes!
-
The International is ranked ahead of Charles River? Jeesus Christ, that's total madness!
David Wigler--where in the hell are you? We have a lot of castrating of Massachusetts raters and rankers to do!
Charles River is a wonderful golf course. I belong to a Donald Ross course and my Dad must have belonged to about 5-6 of them in his life and I would say that Charles River might be the most interesting and most fun Ross course I've ever seen, and that includes one of my all time favorite quirk courses--Misquamicut or even Seminole.
-
I stand corrected - I got the Pine and Oaks courses at the International mixed up. I've heard that the new member's Fazio course is good... but better than others including Essex?
BTUFTS - Interesting you brought it up. I LOVE both Essex and Myopia... if I were to have to play 2 courses within 10 min of each other (and assuming good weather year round, which is impossible on the North Shore) these just might be the 2 I'd like to be "stuck with".
Interesting you brought up the Essex / Myopia comparison. I personally love Essex, so many good / classic holes and the new 13th hole is a wonderful compliment to the course. At the same time, I hope my Manchester friends don't get mad if I say that I just slightly prefer Myopia. The course has just a little more variation and a few more memorable holes. The bunkering is fantastic and the 4th is one of my favorite all-time Par 4's (second only to the 13th at PV) (as long as Matt doesn't double cut & roll the green).
I would put Essex right behind it based on where I've been / what I know. At the same time, I still haven't played Eastward Ho (check out Ran's excellent profile), Charles River and Kittansett - 3 on my wish list and from repuatation seem to challenge the Myopia and Essex connection.
Will be back up in MA this 4th of July - those interested should think of possible tracks to play ;D
-
Chip,
Personally, I like Essex a touch more than Myopia, mainly for the weak hole comparison. I love Myopia as well, but whereas #3, a 250 yd par 3 is fantastic and challenging, numbers 1 (255 par 4) and number 6 (about 265-270) are weak holes. I realized this when playing a junior interclub there (the only times ive played it), i asked the myopia member in my group how do you play #6, and he said, "hopefully a three wood and two putts for birdie" and this came from a 14 yr old.
My other main question about these ratings is why Kittansett jumped ahead of Salem. I thought that the amazing effort that the Salem crew did getting the course back in shape from a tough 2000-2001 winter and hosting the open (with a winning score of E i might add) would help them, but it never happened. Ive never played Kittansett either so I am curious.
-
The reason Kittansett went higher is because of a great renovation and tree removal program, it is a great golf course. I played it last year and was amazed at the strategy that the course had. Then add the tree removal that opened up some great views of the ocean...
I think Eastward Ho! should be even higher, but it is difficult to get on there so I am assuming not many raters get to play. Taconic and Crump belong on the list. It is just amazing that Massachusetts has such a good and varied collection of courses.
-
"It is just amazing that Massachusetts has such a good and varied collection of courses."
Michael Stachowicz:
I don't think it's that amazing. To me it perfectly logical if one looks closely at the evolution of golf architecture in American and how centrally Massachusetts figured into it. Plus the state just has some terrific natural golfing ground--and very varied golfing ground. Plus Massachussetts has a ton of rock and cool rock croppings (out and otherwise) and all in all that can create some fantastically interesting possibilities in golf course architecture!
-
btufts,
I think you need to play Myopia a few more times. #3 is probably the most boring hole on the course because it is basically just a very long par three. Not much strategy to hitting a full driver or three wood into the wind and hoping you're near the green.
#1 and #6 are two of the best holes on the course. I don't believe that length is what makes a hole strong or weak. On both incredibly strategic holes you have to THINK from tee to green. There are many OPTIONS on how to attack each hole and what is wonderful about them is that yes, you can get a three or even a two on either hole and yes, I have seen many people get sixes and even eights on either hole.
-
Winchester and the Orchards are both much stronger courses than the new course at the International -- which is a little like a Florida layout improved by elevation changes available because it is in New England. The omission of Crumpin-Fox in favor of the Ranch is senseless. Massachusetts is fortunate to have so many wonderful courses (even if they are once again buried under snow and ice) but GD's list doesn't just jumble the order, it excludes some of the best courses.
In particular, Essex and Winchester belong on the list along with Charles River and Brae Burn. Ross did some great work in these parts and the courses are well maintained by their memberships. The list needs revision if it is going to capture what is great about playing golf up here.
-
I feel that Golf Digest's rankings are not exactly as you would desire, because there are many people out there who lack the appreciation of a good golf course. To a lot of people a good course is 7500 yards long, water on every hole, massive bunkers that look like things you would see under a microscope, and have huge greens that are more undulating than the Berkshires. I belong at a Ross designed course and there are some members who think it is an awful course, while others say it is one of his best designs south of Boston in Massachusetts.
I have played many of the courses on the top 15, and I do disagree on the placement of some, and the lack of others. The top 15 according to what I have read and played would probably be:
1. The Country Club
2. Kittansett
3. Salem
4. Myopia
5. Nantucket
6. Eastward Ho!
7. Sankaty Head
8. New Seabury
9. Essex
10. Taconic
11. Oyster Harbors
12. Charles River
13. Brae Burn
14. Hyannisport
15. Winchester
I can't really comment on CC National as I have not played it yet, and I have never even heard of The Ranch, let alone anything good.
-
Tim S:
Have you played Crumpin-Fox and if you have do you really believe it's no where near as good as you make New Seabury out to be? To me the big deal with New Seabury comes quite early and then fades like a broken colt down the stretch.
I personally can't see Crumpin-Fox trailing Hyannisport and Taconic either IMHO. Thanks!
-
Tim
I like the looks of your list. Why do you prefer Kittansett to Eastward Ho!?
-
Matt,
I think they are both excellent choices and I don't see anyone missing out if they played either one but I see Taconic ahead of CFox for several reasons. These two are purely personal:
1- CFox has a more claustrophobic feel than Taconic
2- CFox's holes have a more manufactured look than Taconic.
What hurts CFox more than anything else is the forced carries over water to the greens on holes #7, 8, 10, 11, 12, 14, 15 and 18. A hole like 12 has it all around the back of the green and many other holes have some water carries off the tees, although they wouldn't bother good players too much.
Additionally, there are quite a few holes with flanking wetlands or bodies of water.
Contrast this with Taconic and therein lies the preference, IMHO.
p.s. Never mind that Taconic is a club with a great number of players who walk, shoot their age like 82 year old Eliot Asinoff, have never heard of "Winter Rules" and where rounds are always under 4 hours.
-
I failed to mention Crumpin Fox as a course I have not played, and I have little knowledge of it, as I said these are courses which I have played, or read extensively on. I have two reasons for Kittansett being ahead of Eastward Ho! First, Kittansett has the ability to change dramatically, while I am sure Eastward Ho does also, the winds at Kittansett are incredible at times. Also, I have played Kittansett about ten times, while I have only played Eastward once. I was very impressed with it, but I'm sure I would get a much better idea of it by playing there a few more times. Another question I have is, If you were to add another ten courses to this list to make it the top twenty-five, what would they be? Thanks for the input on my list.
-
Jim K:
With all due respect -- the 8th at Crumpin-Fox is a superb hole and one of the finest par-5 you can play in all of New England. It's a question of "dare" for the golfer to decide how aggressive / timid you wish to play the hole.
When you talk about the "non" course aspects of Taconic I don't disagree. The membership is definitely first rate, they take their golf seriously and they don't fart around when playing.
With that said -- the teeth of Taconic has less overall bite than Crumpin-Fox IMHO. Clearly, this comes down to individual preference. I also believe CF has less of the "contrived" or "forced man's hand" that sometimes has been said of other designs by Roger Rulewich. The course just uses the land and unfolds for the player to take in throughout the round. I mean can someone say that CF is not in the top 15 within Massachusetts. Guys, let's not "fall in love" with these wonderful old styled courses and simply forget about what has been successfully with some of the new ones. I don't doubt the qualities of Winchester and Essex but there's more to Mass than just those type of courses and I believe there's enough room for CF to be a part of such a grouping.
Let me just say that I don't doubt Taconic can make a top 15 listing for the Bay State -- I just don't see how CF misses the mark because it is so compelling and clearly, in my mind, the state's best public facility. If you look at New Seabury / Blue you will see a layout that goes for the high notes early in the round with the holes near Nantucket and then as you work away from the front side the bulk of the round you get progression of mundane holes that lack real fire and design initiative.
Jim, when you say "forced carry" let's be clear -- the amount of land you need to cover at CF is not anywhere close to what you have to do at say Bethpage Black with the 10th and 12th holes. A "forced carry" of 200 yards from the tips is not really an issue of being F-O-R-C-E-D. And if it is -- that means the player should really be playing the hole from the next closest tee box IMHO. ;)
-
Matt,
Did you misread my post? I said "forced carries over water to the greens". CFox has 9 such holes with 10/11 and 13/14/15 running consecutively. I never said the 8th wasn't a good hole, just that it, along with 8 of its other siblings, requires a forced carry to the green. I did say that the forced carries off the tees were negligible for most players even though they are present.
Having nine forced carries to greens is repetitive and is enough, I feel, to hold CFox down in the ratings.
Are you saying that you believe a course which F-O-R-C-E-S a player into one type of approach to H-A-L-F of its greens, in this case an aerial shot over water, is stellar architecture?
And as I said in my earlier post, I like this course but it should not rank as high as Taconic mainly because of the limitations caused by the nine forced carries.
-
That list of 15 courses is silly, and so are many other things in the "Best in State" lists, for two good reasons:
1. many of the courses listed are less than two points apart, and
2. the "tradition" numbers count in these listings also.
I hate to say so, but I would guess that the CC of New Seabury gets relatively high numbers in "tradition" because it was actually part of the GOLF DIGEST list in the 1970's. I've never actually gone to see it, but I would be beyond shocked if it was a better course than Essex County Club, which isn't among the top 15 in the state.
-
As to New Seabury, it's not better than Essex or Winchester. For that matter, it's not better than Crumpin Fox-- multiple carries over wter notwithstanding.
-
I'd put Essex County Club ahead of most of the courses on the list.
If Eastward Ho! undertook a good restoration and removed a bunch of trees along the bluff it would jump into the top three in the state IMHO. I certainly liked it better than The Country Club of Brookline.
The same goes for Winchester although it has some pretty featureless greens.
While I have not played Kittansett, I have not spoken to anyone who has played it that thinks it's better than Salem or Myopia.
-
Shouldnt Arnold Palmer's TPC course make it on here?
Additionally, i think most local players would rate Pine Hills and Waverly Oaks ahead of Captains?
-
Jim K:
Mea culpa -- but CF is still a solid and fair layout -- right? The holes are produced to work in concert with the existing land and fortunately the amount of trees do not interfere with the manner by which one should play the holes. If you have to carry some H20 to reacht he greens so be it. I mean Jim, common, we're not talking about playing a course loaded with water like something you would see in southeast Florida -- right?
I have always wondered how New Seabury gets by in the minds of many people. If you look at holes like #2 through #4 you're seeing the best of the ocurse early -- the rest becomes a major let-down.
I do agree with others who've mentioned Essex -- it just seems that Massachusetts is just another state listing that misses the mark IMHO.
P.S. Be curious to ask those in the know how they see the best public courses in the state? Do they see the listing from GW to be accurate? Are the public courses on the Cape really that good?
-
Matt,
I did say that I felt a golfer wouldn't be missing out if he/she played either of these courses. CFox is very soild and more relentless than Taconic and I think it fits your golf-course-as-a-test criteria.
No, the course isn't loaded with water, like some in Fla., but I would refer you to their website which has hole-byhole photos and yardage book.
I really cannot think of any other reason that CFox is not more highly regarded than the one I previously mentioned, too many approaches over water.
-
Serious query:
Why can't LONGMEADOW get any burn?
-
I found an older Golf Digest list, which I copied from their web site in April of 2000. The list might have been compiled in 1999. Here it is:
1) The Country Club
2) Kittansett C.
3) Salem C. C.
4) Nantucket G. C.
5) New Seabury Resort (Blue)
6) Sankaty Head G. C.
7) Myopia Hunt C.
8) Eastward Ho!
9) Hyannisport C.
10) Cyprian Keyes G. C.
11) Winchester C. C.
12) Crumpin-Fox C.
13) Oyster Harbors C.
14) Brae Burn C. C.
15) Essex County C.
The changes I can see are:
-- Nantucket dropped from 4 to 6.
-- New Seabury moved from 5 to 4.
-- Myopia moved from 7 to 5.
-- Sankaty Head moved from 6 to 7.
-- Eastward Ho! moved from 8 to 10.
-- Oyster Harbors moved from 13 to 12.
-- Cyprian Keyes (10), Winnchester (11), Crumpin-Fox (12), and Essex County (15) disappeared.
-- International/Oaks (8), Charles River (11), The Ranch (13), and Cape Cod National (15) appeared.
I've always wondered if the word "National" in the name of a golf course has a subtle positive effect on those evaluating it.
Taconic didn't show up in 2000, either.
-
Cyprian Keys deserved to fall off the list -- the others don't make sense to me. In each case, the replacements are inferior (in some cases, vastly so).
-
I like Cyprian Keyes. In fact, the land is in my blood; my 7th great-grandfather bought a parcel of land in that area from Cyprian Keyes' son in the 1700s. But it's definitely not one of the 15 best courses in MA. In fact, it would have a hard time ranking in the top 5 in some towns (such as Plymouth) these days.
-
OK, I just played the New Seabury Ocean course today for the first time. Up front, I will admit: 1) it was 42 degrees, 2) it was windy, 3) it was raining, 4) the greens were aerated and bare, and 5) I didn't play well.
Ignoring all that, I liked the course, but must agree with the general discussion here that the course is overrated. The views on the front 9 were not there today, obviously, so I think I can discount them.
The thing that struck me most is the carry distances from the tees over bunkers and water. I played from what used to be called the white tees, which are now marked as the blue tees (6,789 yards, 73.9/131). What used to be the blue tees, but which are now marked as the gold tees, are 7,140 yards and 75.8/133. Here are the carry distances, according to the yardage book:
Hole Blue tees Gold tees
--------------------------------
1 161, 199 187, 225
2 219 252
3 226 263
6 206, 206 235, 235
7 208, 216 226, 249
9 230 264
10 201 224
12 261 290
13 206 232
15 174 212
16 224, 213 253, 242
17 191 219
18 201 231
Granted, some of these shots are into a stiff wind, but even in today's conditions, I did not end up in a fairway hazard (I am a 2.3 handicap, and usually drive between 250 and 260).
This course has been "redesigned" twice, by Rees Jones, and recently by Marvin Armstrong. I didn't play before the redesign, so I can't comment on the changes. But I was surprised that the fairway bunkers weren't located in a place where I would consider them to be dangerous.
My bottom line: I liked the course, but not as much as the two Pinehills courses, Waverly Oaks, Red Tail, Shaker Hills, and even The Ranch.
-
Played New Seabury yesterday. Sunny day, brisk breeze off the ocean.
It is a lovely spot with the sunshine sparkling off the sea.
I'm sure the course layout must have been discussed before, with the ocean holes coming so early in the round: 2, 3, 4.
Effectively, the whole front nine was exposed to the wind yesterday. But at 2 and 3 it was straight across left to right and barely possible to keep the ball in play. Add in the fact that the windchill kept one from loosening up, then one was hardly able to challenge the holes with one's best shot.
The inland back 9 was more sheltered. Much as i like to sling a drawing t-shot, the 5 dogleg-left holes on the back-nine would appear a weakness. A player with a natural fade must surely be at a distinct disadvantage here.
The green complexes are varied and interesting, often 'set-up' a few feet allowing a clear view from the fairway of the pins.
The obvious question is why dont they switch the 9s around? Further, it would have been quite straight-forward to design 2 and 3, in reverse direction, to be 16 and 17 (or 7 and 8).
-
rottcod:
You raise a good bit about New Seabury -- but ask yourself this -- how did such a routing come into existence. Thing how much better the overall experience of the course would have been if the architect had weaved the final holes along Nantucket!
I don't doubt the demands of holes 2-4 but after that stretch you don't get the same kind of feeling for the remainder of the round. In many ways New Seabury / Blue is sort of like Spyglass Hill -- the routing should have taken advantage of such a close connection to the ocean. A worthy opportunity was compromised because the best part of the round does in fact come so early.
P.S. For what it's worth -- there is much in Massachusetts that GD got wrong. Crumpin-Fox is just one example -- Essex County is another. I'd be curious if anyone has played the new Nicklaus (albeit Jack's son) at Pine Hills? Is it worth a look from the NYC area?
-
Matt, you are right on on New Seabury. Your adrenaline is pumping by the fourth hole, but the round peaks right there. The two nines is an interesting question, because New Seabury DID switch the nines very briefly last year for the very reasons mentioned above. However, I asked them why they switched the nines back and their answer was interesting. The current 10th hole they said was a problem as the 1st hole because it caused major backups. It's a 90 degree dogleg left par 4 that is sharply downhill. They said that their were big backups because people couldn't see most of the fairway, so the waits on the tee for the fairway to clear were too long, aided by the forest on the left, which left a lot of people searching for their balls for a long time.
Re: Pinehills, I have played the new Nicklaus course. I personally think the Joens coursemay be slightly better, but they are both good. The Jones course is tougher off the tee but much easier greens to hit, whereas the Nicklaus course is the opposite, wide fairways but smaller better protected greens. There are more houses on the Nicklaus course too. I personally wouldn't travel from NY to play it, but if you do, feel free to send me an instant message, I'd love to play there with you. I have some other ideas on MA courses if you're interested.
Dan
-
I agree that the Pinehills courses are both very nice, but probably not worth a special trip from NY.
The comments about New Seabury not taking advantage of the ocean (Nantucket Sound) frontage remind me of Ocean Hammock, the new Nicklaus course in Palm Harbor, FL. That course has a little more frontage than New Seabury, but not much. The 9th and 18th holes there are along the ocean, with other holes playing towards it, or offering peaks at it. I think it's much more dramatic and effective than what New Seabury has.
-
For those familiar with golf in MA, where would Belmont fit in ?
-
I have not personally played Belmont, but I spoke with my Pro a few weeks ago about it. He said it's outstanding, one of hte best Ross courses in the area. He put it in the same class as Concord and Winchester, both of which I've played and loved.
-
Any thoughts on WORCESTER CC, sounds like a below the radar Ross. Haven't played it, is it any good?
-
Mike, I have to admit that I have not played Worcester either, but i was playing with someone at my club who had just played it, along with Charles River & Brae Burn, and he said Worcester was his favorite, felt it was an underated Ross course. Sorry, i don't have mroe than that, but people in MA all say wonderful things about it.
Dan
-
I have played extensively in Massachusetts and cannot believe the ratings that were posted. Here is my list:
Salem CC
Taconic GC
Charles River
The Country Club (but only in the Open configuration)
Essex County Club
Wyantenuck
The Orchards
Sankaty Head
Worcester Country Club
Brae Burn
Myopia Hunt Club
Oyster Harbors
Eastward Ho
Kittansett
Longmeadow
Whitinsville
Frankly, the inclusion of the International, if it is the new Fazio course may have some merit, New Seabury is a joke and a bad one.
I probably would have inclused Wianno and Hyannisport but my list is already Ross top heavy.
-
Pat:
Belmont is a very good golf course that was unfortunately broken up due to road construction. The remaining Ross holes on the course are wonderful and challenging. The three or four replaced holes are jerry-rigged and not in tune with the originals.
As for Worcester, it is a sleeper and a marvelous design. Tough piece of property.
Whitinsville is the best nine-hole course in the States.
-
Just a quick note to second Whitinsville's nomination to the best nine holer in the state. A terrific course with alot of strategy and interesting terrain.
Belmont is a good course, with alot of elevation change. I think it could be better with the recovery of some lost options due to tree planting.
-
I just played Oyster Harbors yesterday for the first time.
The course is not very long (6700 yards), does not have major elevation changes, has wide fairways, and lacks meaningful fairway bunkers (if you can fly it 220 or so).
Given all of that, I just loved the course, mostly because of the greens and the bunkers around the greens. They weren't very fast yesterday, but they were still quite challenging because of all of the ridges, humps, and other contours. This is definitely a course where hitting the green isn't enough; if you're on the wrong side of a hump, you are in trouble.
And missing a green always meant an interesting chip, or a tough sand shot to an elevated green. After a while, I ended up putting most of the time, since chipping required much more precise control than it does at most courses. Usually you can land your chip several feet short or long of your target and still be OK; at Oyster Harbors, hitting or missing a ridge by a foot makes a huge difference.
The greens should be much faster next week for the tournament; the pro shop guy said that they were going to double-cut them and double-roll them.
The only other Donald Ross course I have played is Essex (four years ago), which I liked. But I like Oyster Harbors much more; am I just not remembering Essex well enough?
-
intermurph:
Yes -- you are! ;)
-
intermurph:
Yes -- you are! ;)
Are you saying:
1) Yes, you are remembering Essex well, or
2) Yes, you are not remembering Essex well
-
intermurph:
I mean YOU are simply forgetting the qualities of Essex.
It's a bit beyond Oyster Harbors and I do like OH too. ;)
-
OK, I'll have to take your word for it for another month. I'm playing a qualifier at Essex for the MA Amateur championship.
I do recall that Essex has more in the way of elevation changes, which I am a sucker for.
The championship itself is being held at THECountry Club.
-
intermurph
Take Matt's view with a grain of salt....you lost him when you commented on the greens.
Matt
You forgot to add 'in my opinion', that way we don't confuse your opinion with the truths sent down from God.
-
Chick:
Everything I say is "my opinion" and you know what -- you forgot to add that to your humble ::) contribution. ;)
P.S. If you think Oyster Harbors is a better overall coruse than Essex County please articulate it because if I'm missing something I'd like to get it straight from the horse's mouth. By the way the greens at Essex County aren't exactly chop liver and they do provide a healthy assortment of chips and pitch possibilities no less than Oyster Harbors.
-
A Mass. course that seems to be overlooked and I've not heard much about is Tedesco C.C. It's hosting the MGA's
100th Open championship this year and that would seem to suggest that it may be a quality track. I've never heard much and am curious what others think. Also the Ranch is a good course and shouldn't be shunned simply because its new and no one knows much about Damian Pascuzzo.
-
RDecker,
Tedesco CC is my home course, and is indeed hosting the Mass. Open this summer. It is the MGA's 100th year this year, as well as Tedesco's centennial. The course has suffered a good deal of winter damage, and the entire course has yet to open fully as the grounds crew is working feverishly on it. As for the course itself, I wrote a piece on it under My Home Course, although the pics are not that good. It is probably in the second tier of Boston-area courses, below many of the Ross and Flynn classics that have been mentioned. However, it still provides a stern test for the state's best players, as the greens are lightning, and 15-18 are par 4s averaging about 425.
-
I played both New Seabury and Oyster Harbors again this week, in brilliant sunshine, warm temperatures, and relatively little wind.
I liked New Seabury a little better this time, but I still don't consider it top 10 public-access in Massachusetts.
I still like Oyster Harbors, and had what I think is a classic Donald Ross moment on #2. I was 235 from the green, with a slight breeze in my face. I hit a 3-wood, which I can fly about 235 to 240. The pin was behind the right front bunker, but I aimed well left, because I'd rather be chipping up the hill on the green than blasting out of the sand.
Anyway, I pushed it, right at the bunker, and started cursing myself as I watched my ball track the sand like a smart bomb. Except that it didn't splash; it miraculously cleared the bunker. I must have killed that ball!
Of course, when I got to the green, I noticed that there was a solid 20 yards between the bunker and the green, and my ball sat right in the middle. And I had just played the course a week ago!
He got me again!