Dr Winston O Boogie jr |
11-18-2020 09:19 AM |
They redid the greens about two years ago and they are just as bad now as they were before.
The layout is pretty bad. The first and third greens are ridiculous the way the back of the green slopes away. It makes the green about 1/3 smaller than they actually are. Not a big problem on 3 where you're hitting a short shot into it, but number one plays about 160 from the back. Number two is almost a dogleg left par three with a very difficult green. I don't like it when you have to curve a ball around a tree on a par three. Four and five are short shots to big flat greens. Those are the kind of greens that should be on the longer holes. Six is another hole where, depending on where the tees are located, trees can block a straight shot to the green. Again on one of he longest holes on the course, one of the most difficult greens. Seven in a nice little par four and eight is a lengthy par three with a well designed green. The comes nine. I was really hoping that when they redid the greens a few years ago that they would have redesigned this green. From the back tee, the hole plays at about 180 yards. The smallish green is perched on a little hill and the entire green slopes away from you. Unless you are a tour player hitting a seven iron from 180, it is almost impossible to stop the ball on this green. I've hit many very good shots on that hole only to find myself chipping from beyond the green.
It seems like the most difficult greens are on the longest holes and the easiest greens to hit and to putt are on the shortest holes. That is exactly backward from good golf course design. Because of that and the dogleg par threes it's not one of my favorites.
In addition, I've never seen it in good condition.
Please keep in mind that these is only my opinions. I understand that we are all allowed to have them.
|