Golf Club Atlas
GolfClubAtlas.com => Golf Course Architecture => Topic started by: JNC Lyon on April 09, 2011, 10:10:30 PM
-
With Kyle H as tour guide, I had a hell of a day of golf in Philly. We played the duo of Inniscrone and Paxon Hollow today, and while we nearly followed it with an extra nine at Jeffersonville or an extra 18 at Walnut Lane (either one would have been doable in hindsight), the 36 hole journey was plenty of architecture for one day.
Paxon Hollow is a sporty track with a ton of great stuff going on, and it will definitely get some discussion later on. However, the course I really want to talk about with the treehouse is Gil Hanse's Inniscrone in Avondale, Pennsylvania.
Inniscrone is a remarkable place for several reasons. It was originally founded as an exclusive private club for the Philly/Wilmington, DE area. The course was then sold and went through several ownership changes and talks of restoration. Now, it is owned by the local township and open for public play at reasonable rates. Inniscrone was one of the first profiles I read from Ran this site, and it was one of those profiles that inspired me and showed me that there was some great golf architecture outside the magazine rankings. With that background, I got to play the course for the first time today and was thoroughly impressed.
Gil Hanse's work at Inniscrone is exactly what I am looking for in a golf course. Throughout my short experience with golf architecture, I have always been conflicted between the courses with heavy drama and quirk and those with more subtlety. Addington is a hell of a course, but the quirky and dramatic features wear the player out after awhile. On the other hand, a course like Swinley Forest is filled with understated elegance, but it runs a little short on the drama. Inniscrone finds a great balance between these two types of courses. With the first three holes, the golfer is introduced to Gil Hanse's understated style. He has limited bunkering, strategy that is exceedingly simple but timeless, and designs greens with one or two dominant contours. The course follows the lay of the land, particularly in the placement of the bunkers and the contour of the greens.
The 3rd at Inniscrone is one of my absolute favorite holes on the course. The dramatic fairway bunkering draws the golfer's eye to left first, and since this is a short par four, the golfer will be tempted to rip driver at the green. Of course, the best play is to the higher right side of the fairway. This position leaves a look right down the throat of the green, and the best drives may even catch the slope of the fairway and trundle onto the green. Yet no matter where the golfer leaves his tee shot, the fun is only starting. The green at Inniscrone's 3rd is impressive in its simplicity. It slopes slightly from front to back and follows the cant of the land from right to left. The green is not manufactured or contrived to be overly difficult. It is just there, an integral part of the land. The green's uncompromising naturalism makes any approach shot fearsome, as the golfer has to place in the right spot or face a high number on the course's shortest par four. The 3rd hole relies on brilliant use of the land and restraint to create the timeless strategy, an approach Hanse uses repeatedly in different form throughout the layout.
For all of the great subtle holes out there (3, 6, 9, 12, 13, and 15 are among the best), Inniscrone has tons of drama. This drama begins at the 4th, which features a long forced carry from the back tee followed by a long iron approach across a valley to a brilliant shelf green. It continues on holes like 8, a brilliant Redan where a driver from the back tees makes the kick plates pop out, 10, and 16 through 18. Each of these holes has their detractors, as they contain features that make them difficult for the weaker player. In my mind, this holes are brilliant because of their distribution within the course. These holes are used sparingly and placed at the correct intervals during the routing. The first three holes ease the golfer in before bringing on the thrill at the 4th. The golfer gets some subtlety for the next three holes before resuming the ride at the 8th. After a tough but brilliant 9th, the golfer gets the 10th, takes in some great architecture on the 11 through 15, and hits a dramatic flourish on the last three holes. These holes may be tough, but they are score-able and a hell of a lot of fun if you can hit the shots. The 17th is a giant par four with forced carries on the tee shot and the approach, but the hole is a thrill to play because of the benched greensite that allows golfers to feed in shots from right to left. These holes are difficult and may not fit the traditionalist mold, but they add to the rugged and simple appeal of Inniscrone.
Inniscrone balances these dramatic holes and subtle, strategic holes perfectly. The course is not an adrenaline high, but it instead shifts between the contemplative and the furious. Hanse knew when to take a risk (the 9th, with its ridgeline bunkering and bunkerless green, is a great example), and he knew when to leave well enough alone. He routes the course perfectly, never straining the course's flow despite the constraints of the property. Despite the recent development along the course, the golfer feels at one with the land throughout. Inniscrone never tries too hard; it just steps back and lets the golfer take it in.
Is Inniscrone the model for what architecture should be? Is it a critical study in minimalist architecture?
-
John-
Not sure you're gonna stir the pot here....I played Inniscrone at its peak and it left our group with a very 'strange' feeling...not sure I can offer more as it was years ago. That said, it's also in no-mans-land PA, so I think it struggles there too. At any rate, I'm curious to see what folks have to say as it's a place that I feel is a coin-flip away from being a mushroom farm.
-
From what I remember (and this did NOT come from Gil!), the original owner was "challenging". Take #10 as the poster child - I don't think anybody would build that hole if they had a chance, but I was told that the owner insisted.
This is all 2nd hand information, so please don't take it as fact.
Jason - you're right about the location, but I have a lot of faith in Lori Van Sickle's management of the place. Lori was the head pro at DuPont and did a great job up there.
-
One of my favorite munis in the area JNC. Here is a photo thread from 2009:
http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,39584.0.html
-
How far is it from downtown Philly?
-
How far is it from downtown Philly?
Little less than an hour.
-
Great memories of play there, Joe.
Thanks for all that work to present what the early days of Hanse and Kittleman did produce. What a team that grew so noteable and sound, so rapidly - in this day and age - when things are tough, the cream comes to the top.
-
Paxon Hollow kicks ass! ;D ;D ;D
-
JNC- I am glad you had a good day with Kyle. I am sorry I couldn't join you for one of the rounds. Sounds like you enjoyed Inniscrone. Many here don't like it; I don't know why. Myself, I am not a low-handicap player (I'm a 13, and I played it in November of 07, with JB), so I was certainly not in peak form to play it. I didn't see the problems with a lot of the holes that a lot have chirped about. It's certainly not easy; I personally think that a lot of Gil Hanse courses are hard as hell--and there probably are a few areas on the course that are questionable--but it's not bad by any stretch, it is good. I think it's less penal than French Creek in most spots.
Played from the right set of tees for the player, it's enjoyable. (Although, it's far, considering a lot of one's options to play closer to Philadelphia). I don't think it's a course where one can expect to make a lot of birdies.
I have thought about the oft-discussed #10. Given the wetlands the hole has to traverse, would it make sense to move the tees forward, and expand the green complex, and have a driveable par 4, with the option for the shorter or weaker player to hit an iron and a wedge? I wonder.
15 is an outstanding par 5 if played correctly. Wonderful center bunker complex and the green accepts a low, running approach.
I also don't see how 16 is such a bad hole or so unfair. I see a lot of Merion influence in this hole. It's not as if the player is asked to hit a 3 wood to this green. Hit a driver to the lower fw and a pitching wedge.
What I also noticed with the fairway bunker complexes is a bit of a mix of a Flynn and Ross influence. I am generalizing here, but my experience with Flynn fairway bunkers is that they should be avoided--play away from them for the better angle to the green (in many cases, not all). Ross courses I have played seem to reward a player who carries a fairway bunker complex. I see both strategies at work here.
17 is difficult with length and wetlands. Otherwise, playing smart, a golfer could make a scrambling par.
18 gives both the high and low handicapper the chance to score well.
-
I'll comment more later but I would like to point out that JNC and I were behind a five-some on the first nine which reduced to a four-some for the second nine and....
We. Did. Not. Wait. For. One. Shot.
Amazing.
I thanked them and offered to buy their lunch after the round.
-
John-
Not sure you're gonna stir the pot here....I played Inniscrone at its peak and it left our group with a very 'strange' feeling...not sure I can offer more as it was years ago. That said, it's also in no-mans-land PA, so I think it struggles there too. At any rate, I'm curious to see what folks have to say as it's a place that I feel is a coin-flip away from being a mushroom farm.
I don't care what your group felt.
What did YOU, Jason Walker, feel? What is the "strange" feeling?
-
I've expressed my thoughts on Inniscrone many times here, and won't repeat them. But, since yet another thread's been started, I can't resist summarizing. I think it is one of the worst courses ever built by a quality architect trying to build a quality course. Probably the best evidence of it's worth is the fact that it utterly failed. And don't blame the location. Plenty of good, out of the way places have done well. (See Stonewall in the Philly area.) As for a hole by hole critique, I'm too lazy to do it again. My favorite beef, of course, is with the drop kick par three (the 4th, I think). I'm convinced that Hanse mistakenly delivered a 17 hole course, and when the error was pointed out, threw in the drop kicker.
-
I've expressed my thoughts on Inniscrone many times here, and won't repeat them. But, since yet another thread's been started, I can't resist summarizing. I think it is one of the worst courses ever built by a quality architect trying to build a quality course. Probably the best evidence of it's worth is the fact that it utterly failed. And don't blame the location. Plenty of good, out of the way places have done well. (See Stonewall in the Philly area.) As for a hole by hole critique, I'm too lazy to do it again. My favorite beef, of course, is with the drop kick par three (the 4th, I think). I'm convinced that Hanse mistakenly delivered a 17 hole course, and when the error was pointed out, threw in the drop kicker.
Jim, if you have an axe to grind with the business model of the course, or prior ownership, that's outside of the course's architecture. Keep it to yourself. Did you play the course? From which set of tees? Something tells me something else is coloring your opinion of the course.
-
I've expressed my thoughts on Inniscrone many times here, and won't repeat them. But, since yet another thread's been started, I can't resist summarizing. I think it is one of the worst courses ever built by a quality architect trying to build a quality course. Probably the best evidence of it's worth is the fact that it utterly failed. And don't blame the location. Plenty of good, out of the way places have done well. (See Stonewall in the Philly area.) As for a hole by hole critique, I'm too lazy to do it again. My favorite beef, of course, is with the drop kick par three (the 4th, I think). I'm convinced that Hanse mistakenly delivered a 17 hole course, and when the error was pointed out, threw in the drop kicker.
JNC almost aced this hole, it's the fifth.
If architecture is the leading cause of success/failure then we've got a lot of wrong ideas about architecture, that's for sure. Your logic is flawed in that regard, as cum hoc egro proctor hoc is your construct.
-
I recall looking at photos (probably Joe's) and thinking the course looks quite severe or dramatic as JNC would put it. A lot of shots looked do or die with rough, bunkers, hilly terrain and wetlands(?). In any case, Inniscrone didn't look like my sorta course, but it seems cheap enough that giving it a go can't cause too much harm.
Ciao
-
Jim
I think the hole in question was originally intended to be something other than what it is but some permitting issue created a problem.
-
Inniscrone is a pretty neat golf course, but I really think its the location that's holding it down.
Mark
-
The 17th hole is like a punch in the chops because of its placement in the round. It's long and narrow and by the time one gets to that hole their legs can be anywhere from tired to no longer functioning and to hit one long and straight at that point for me is a challenge. I assume there is a property line up the right hand side that necessitates the narrowness. If not then Hanse is just cruel.
-
Jim
I think the hole in question was originally intended to be something other than what it is but some permitting issue created a problem.
Yes, I believe the intended tee for the 5th hole was to be down and to left of the 4th green, playing to the same green now.
-
Inniscrone is a pretty neat golf course, but I really think its the location that's holding it down.
Mark
If you haven't been down to Inniscrone in a few years, you would amazed how much that area how grown. As you exit off of Rt 1 onto 41S, there is a gigantic strip mall with a Lowe's, restaurants, etc.
Inniscrone has definitely found their niche now as a muni. When I was there last weekend it was fairly crowded with a bunch of regular weekend warrior golfers as far as I could tell.
-
I've expressed my thoughts on Inniscrone many times here, and won't repeat them. But, since yet another thread's been started, I can't resist summarizing. I think it is one of the worst courses ever built by a quality architect trying to build a quality course. Probably the best evidence of it's worth is the fact that it utterly failed. And don't blame the location. Plenty of good, out of the way places have done well. (See Stonewall in the Philly area.) As for a hole by hole critique, I'm too lazy to do it again. My favorite beef, of course, is with the drop kick par three (the 4th, I think). I'm convinced that Hanse mistakenly delivered a 17 hole course, and when the error was pointed out, threw in the drop kicker.
Thanks for only summarizing Jim.
-
Jim
I think the hole in question was originally intended to be something other than what it is but some permitting issue created a problem.
Yes, I believe the intended tee for the 5th hole was to be down and to left of the 4th green, playing to the same green now.
Wow. That makes a lot of sense and would be a very very neat hole.
Mark
-
Inniscrone is a pretty neat golf course, but I really think its the location that's holding it down.
Mark
If you haven't been down to Inniscrone in a few years, you would amazed how much that area how grown. As you exit off of Rt 1 onto 41S, there is a gigantic strip mall with a Lowe's, restaurants, etc.
Inniscrone has definitely found their niche now as a muni. When I was there last weekend it was fairly crowded with a bunch of regular weekend warrior golfers as far as I could tell.
I guess Im not surprised that the area has built up a bit and I am very glad to hear its doing well now as a muni. I guess at about 2 hours from Allentown, there are a few places I need to see for the first time before a return trip to Inniscrone.
Mark
-
I would like those who fancy the course to speak to how two blind tee shots with blind trouble should be weighted in an evaluation of the course.
-
From 'Courses By Country':
'Inhis January 2000 FeatureInterview on this site, Hanse commented that someone whom he respects had told him that there are many features at Inniscrone he likes quite a bit but that in places it seemed Hanse had overdone things, trying to inject too many particular features into the course.'
That's exactly how I felt when playing there.
-
Mike, where was there blind trouble?
JB gave me the lines a few times off the tee (for ex, I recall on 2, aim left of a rock (maybe?). I recall more blindness/blind trouble at Lederach and French Creek.
I would like those who fancy the course to speak to how two blind tee shots with blind trouble should be weighted in an evaluation of the course.
-
From 'Courses By Country':
'Inhis January 2000 FeatureInterview on this site, Hanse commented that someone whom he respects had told him that there are many features at Inniscrone he likes quite a bit but that in places it seemed Hanse had overdone things, trying to inject too many particular features into the course.'
That's exactly how I felt when playing there.
Michael Blake, do you have anything constructive to add, or are you just joining the me-too pile on?
-
Mayday,
I'm not sure which tee shots you are talking about, because I felt most of the trouble was very visible off the tees. If blind trouble does exist, it can be avoided by advance research and multiple plays.
Sean,
Some of the holes have that drama (minus the rough, which was way down when I played on Saturday), but many of the holes are very understated. On the whole, the course relies on the existing land more than contrived heroics. On holes where there is a do-or-die shot, Hanse gives players plenty of room, with kick plates to help the golfer avoid hazards and sling shots onto greens. This is true on the 4th (although the kick plate could be wider here), the 8th, and the 17th. Sean, I think you would like Inniscrone a lot. It's subtlety was more surprising and impressive to me than its drama.
-
JNC,
3 and 4 are definitely my favorite holes out there.
Mark
-
Hi Doug,
Certainly not piling on.
Just my opinion and the 'feel' I had there.
Check your PM.
-
#10 and #5 have blind drives to areas with significant penalties.
For the record, I play there whenever invited but don't recommend it.
-
#10 and #5 have blind drives to areas with significant penalties.
For the record, I play there whenever invited but don't recommend it.
I'm still confused here. 5 is a par three where a player gets a full view of the green after coming off the 4th. 10 is straight downhill to a very wide fairway that only ends in wetlands at about 300 yards from the back tees. The wetlands are visible from the tee, so I'm not sure what the issue is here.
10 is the weakest hole on the course, no doubt, and it would have been better if Hanse had built a more interesting green complex. The 13th at Lederach is a hole that remains interesting even with the awkward wetlands crossing, and it is all because of the greensite. If 10 at Inniscrone had that sort of green complex, it would be much more interesting. Even so, it is not an unreasonable hole as is because there is plenty of room off the tee and on the approach.
-
I've expressed my thoughts on Inniscrone many times here, and won't repeat them. But, since yet another thread's been started, I can't resist summarizing. I think it is one of the worst courses ever built by a quality architect trying to build a quality course. Probably the best evidence of it's worth is the fact that it utterly failed. And don't blame the location. Plenty of good, out of the way places have done well. (See Stonewall in the Philly area.) As for a hole by hole critique, I'm too lazy to do it again. My favorite beef, of course, is with the drop kick par three (the 4th, I think). I'm convinced that Hanse mistakenly delivered a 17 hole course, and when the error was pointed out, threw in the drop kicker.
Jim, I have several problems with this critique, but two spring to mind:
1) What quality architect would not try to build a quality golf course? That sentence makes zero sense, and I'm not sure what holes (besides maybe the 10th) you see as bad golf holes.
2) What is the issue with the 5th? People love to make these comments about short par threes, and I think they are 100 percent garbage. Was the 7th at Pebble Beach an add-in? How about the Postage Stamp? The 13th at Merion? Tiny par threes have tremendous merit, and the 5th at Inniscrone requires a ton of control with a short club. This type of par three is much more interesting and infinitely more challenging to a good player than a stock 175-yarder.
-
#10 and #5 have blind drives to areas with significant penalties.
I'll give you #10 Mayday.
But I'm assuming you mean #4 as the other, and I would not consider it a blind drive. Yes, from the white tees you have to be careful to not tumble down left over the hill:
View from the tips:
(http://xchem.villanova.edu/~bausch/images/Inniscrone4GCA/No4a.jpg)
View from the other tees:
(http://xchem.villanova.edu/~bausch/images/Inniscrone4GCA/No4b.jpg)
-
I'm assuming he means the long 7th, with its drive around the corner.
I thoroughly enjoyed my day at Inniscrone. I can see someone not loving it, but I can't even begin to conceive of someone calling it the worst anything, unless it's simply the worst Hanse course, which is a little like saying a young beauty is the ugliest VS Angel...
I loved every hole on the front 9, save #5 (I have a personal problem with drop shot par 3s, haven't yet seen one I really like). I didn't enjoy the back quite as much - 10 is indeed odd, and 17 just kicked me in the nuts a couple times too many for me to be objective.
-
I'm assuming he means the long 7th, with its drive around the corner.
Ok, you might not see the ball land, and there is a bunker on the inside elbow that is blind....
(http://xchem.villanova.edu/~bausch/images/Inniscrone4GCA/No7a.jpg)
-
I guess I'm not tall enough but I can't see the green on #5 from the white tees and there is death long.
-
Joe,
There is a hidden bunker on 7, which, of course, is also visible from 3. I thought that bunker is more effective by being hidden, because it makes the golfer uncertain as to the best line off the tee. You might try to cut off the dogleg right on the first go at the hole, but, once you realize the bunker is there, it will make you re-evaluate on future players. I think the bunker's hidden nature makes it more strategic over multiple rounds.
Again, I don't see the problem with hidden hazards on 5 and 7, because both of these hazards are visible from preceding holes. A careful golf will realize there is trouble long on 5 and a bunker to the right on 7.
-
Mayday,
I'm not sure which tee shots you are talking about, because I felt most of the trouble was very visible off the tees. If blind trouble does exist, it can be avoided by advance research and multiple plays.
Sean,
Some of the holes have that drama (minus the rough, which was way down when I played on Saturday), but many of the holes are very understated. On the whole, the course relies on the existing land more than contrived heroics. On holes where there is a do-or-die shot, Hanse gives players plenty of room, with kick plates to help the golfer avoid hazards and sling shots onto greens. This is true on the 4th (although the kick plate could be wider here), the 8th, and the 17th. Sean, I think you would like Inniscrone a lot. It's subtlety was more surprising and impressive to me than its drama.
JNC
You could be right and the price is right to take a punt, but I can only be convinced on site.
Ciao
-
I guess I'm not tall enough but I can't see the green on #5 from the white tees and there is death long.
From the typical placement of the white tees, this isn't a problem unless you are 2' tall. ;)
But from all the way back on the back tee box, you can't see much of the green unless you are 10' tall.
-
I guess I'm not tall enough but I can't see the green on #5 from the white tees and there is death long.
From the typical placement of the white tees, this isn't a problem unless you are 2' tall. ;)
But from all the way back on the back tee box, you can't see much of the green unless you are 10' tall.
I'm not sure what the problem is with the 5th hole. It's a sand wedge shot, and likely a half wedge at that. Feel an 80-yard shot, aim for the correct half of the green, and just hit it.
Looking at a few other holes, ok, there are some chutes on 4 and 17, but I recall Beechtree had some as well, and I don't recall anybody howling there.
-
I prefer #17 at Paxon Hollow to #5 at Inniscrone. I certainly experience more of a feeling that I see the trouble. I'm waiting for #12 Cobbs for sure ;D
-
I prefer #17 at Paxon Hollow to #5 at Inniscrone. I certainly experience more of a feeling that I see the trouble. I'm waiting for #12 Cobbs for sure ;D
Yes and me too. :)
-
I'm interested in comments on #16. Is the left option a good one? Is the blind approach from the right good?
-
I'm interested in comments on #16. Is the left option a good one? Is the blind approach from the right good?
IMO, left is clearly the preferred route on 16. I aim at the embankment between the two fairways and swing hard. A little draw leaves a view to just about all pins except for way right. Block the drive a bit and the approach from the high road is semi-blind at best.
I love the hole partly b/c I've never played anything quite like it.
-
When I say Hanse (a quality architect) was hire to build a quality course, I mean he was hired to build a $50,000 initiation course, not a muni, which is what he built. Among the other architecturally deficient holes is the 7th - a par five where the best line to shoot the lowest score is to hit the tee shot right at the people playing three - a great architectural concept if you're in the hardhat business. I suppose this could be fixed by adding an internal out of bounds - a truly awful architectural feature. I won't take the bait and go over all my issues again. Let's just say I think the course stinks, and apparently the consuming public agrees.
-
John/Joe/Kyle et al...
I'm in a bit late on this one, sorry.
We had a group of guests at PVGC we were entertaining and Pine Hill was unavailable for the afternoon so, at my behest, probably through the inspiration of GCA, we all went to Inniscrone.
The guests as well as my Pine Valley member were not terribly impressed.
However, I liked the course. My memory is a bit vague but I remember really liking the green complexes.
The property is challenging and I cant blame Gil Hanse for some of the awkward holes. Yes, the tenth is an abomination but it is a very hilly property. John, what hole would you suggest as an alternative?
Not a great course for walking either.
None the less, I could move to this area of North Delaware/ SE PA and be very pleased to play this as my home course.
-
Jim Coleman,
Weren't Inniscrone and Fieldstone opened around the same time? I think that was one too many upscale private courses with demanding courses for that area. So, I'm not sure it was the architecture that is to blame for its demise but I do think it doesn't translate to the public's perception of good golf.
-
Not sure if Fieldstone and Inniscrone are considered to be in the same geographic area. I do like Fieldstone, however, although there are some pretty tough walks between a couple of greens and tees. If Fieldstone and Inniscrone were competing for the same customers, the far better course won. Capitalism works again!
-
Let's just say I think the course stinks, and apparently the consuming public agrees.
They don't, the place was packed and has a solid following. We played on a cool, rainy morning and the range and tee sheet were booked. You're out of the loop on this one, it would seem.
And playing the 7th from the 3rd hole is a terrible route into that green - everything about the terrain is working away from you and carrying the bunker at the crest of the hill is difficult to say the least. While it may be the shortest route, it's hardly the most convenient or enticing. I've missed right off that tee enough to know that playing outside the turn is by far the superior route.
I really get the feeling that you need a second, or maybe third look at this place. Your opinion seems jaded by some other motivating factor. Did you pay a lot? Get caught in traffic? Run out of golf balls?
Mike Malone,
Add Hartefeld National to the mix for that area. I didn't even think of Fieldstone.
All,
Why is the 10th an abomination? I watched John hit a 30-40 yard hook with a DRIVER and hold the fairway. Have any of you played the golf course enough to actually figure out which shot to hit? Furthermore, the green is fully reachable from just in front of the forward tee (I've done this with 5wood).
How many times have the players not keen on the place played Inniscrone? It's definitely a golf course one needs to played a handful of times.
By the way, the 12th hole is a keen model for what 450-500 yard hole should be. 90 yards width of fairway, 30 of which is useful.
-
When I say Hanse (a quality architect) was hire to build a quality course, I mean he was hired to build a $50,000 initiation course, not a muni, which is what he built. Among the other architecturally deficient holes is the 7th - a par five where the best line to shoot the lowest score is to hit the tee shot right at the people playing three - a great architectural concept if you're in the hardhat business. I suppose this could be fixed by adding an internal out of bounds - a truly awful architectural feature. I won't take the bait and go over all my issues again. Let's just say I think the course stinks, and apparently the consuming public agrees.
Can't say I agree with any of this.
I don't have the breadth of playing experience of many on here, but I'm hard pressed to think of a single course that doesn't have a hole in play from another, save the obvious exceptions with PV-like isolation or Kapalua-like scale. If you can't make the carry to the 7th fairway, or at least right rough, you shouldn't be taking that line.
As for the capitalism comments, there are top 100 courses that have gone under and top 1000 courses that are flourishing - architecture/design plays only one role among many in determining a course's future.
-
So why is it unpopular ?
-
So why is it unpopular ?
Can we establish the premise that it is unpopular?
-
Kyle,
I knew you were going to jump on that statement. But let's be real. Malcolm's experience seems to jibe with my feed back. When Rolling Green was regrassing in 2000 Inniscrone was one of our reciprocals. (It did charge a modest green fee which ,I guess, was a turnoff for our cheap members). But, I can't recall anyone who played there thinking it was worth a second visit. I imagine this is when Jim Coleman went there.
Could it be that several of the par fours are rather penal ? Could it be that most golfers just won't forgive a hole like #10 when the other holes don't overcome it enough?
I don't really know the answer.
-
Kyle,
I knew you were going to jump on that statement. But let's be real. Malcolm's experience seems to jibe with my feed back. When Rolling Green was regrassing in 2000 Inniscrone was one of our reciprocals. (It did charge a modest green fee which ,I guess, was a turnoff for our cheap members). But, I can't recall anyone who played there thinking it was worth a second visit. I imagine this is when Jim Coleman went there.
Could it be that several of the par fours are rather penal ? Could it be that most golfers just won't forgive a hole like #10 when the other holes don't overcome it enough?
I don't really know the answer.
What were your expectations going in?
As with most things, I think golfers especially establish an opinion and expectation of a golf course before they actually play it. It's taken me sometime to train myself to manage this tendency but I'm still not completely over it. I've only experienced Inniscrone in it's latest management structure so I can't really relate to any experience I would have had when it was private.
Golf courses where a high single-digit handicap will have to go outside their comfort zone to shoot their handicap tend to elicit strong emotions.
Do you think the experience of some golfers with Inniscrone is akin to yours with Hidden Creek?
-
I can't really speak for many others but I think most, like me, had no real impression of the course. Intuitively, I think golfers like the terrain of courses out that way so they would expect a positive experience. Since I wasn't a gca guy in 2000 I wasn't affected by the reviews here. However, the word soon circulated that there were a few horrible holes there. I think this poisoned the water for most. Because there is some fine golf there I think most came away lukewarm and not to the level of Jim Coleman's feelings.
My sense now is that the public golfers I know won't go past Glen Mills if they want an upscale experience. And if they were to go that far they prefer Wyncote. So even Hartefeld rarely comes up in the conversation.
-
...Could it be that most golfers just won't forgive a hole like #10 when the other holes don't overcome it enough?
I'm amazed that anyone would feel that 1,2,3,4,6,7,8,9,11,12,13,14,15 are not really good, really fun holes. I can see someone having a problem with 5 & 10 - I don't think they're bad, but I also wouldn't say they're good. I can also see someone not liking 16, and someone finding 17 & 18 too hard (though I personally would disagree with all of those opinions). I can see someone not loving Inniscrone. I can't see someone hating it, or saying it stinks. If it stinks, then all but maybe 5 courses I've played in my life stink. Perhaps some should take a moment to thank the golfing gods for their own personal good fortune. :)
I played Lehigh the next day and absolutely loved it. In fact, I prefer it by a good margin. But some of the same problems cited on this thread exist there as well - holes in play from other holes, difficulty dealing with abrupt terrain. I'd say Lehigh surmounts those problems in a better manner, but after hearing Gil speak, I'm inclined to believe that if he had had the freedom that Flynn had, Inniscrone would be a better course than it is currently (Inniscrone, that is, not Lehigh, sorry if that's awkward).
EDIT: fixed my typo in the first sentence, thanks, Mike!
-
I can't really speak for many others but I think most, like me, had no real impression of the course. Intuitively, I think golfers like the terrain of courses out that way so they would expect a positive experience. Since I wasn't a gca guy in 2000 I wasn't affected by the reviews here. However, the word soon circulated that there were a few horrible holes there. I think this poisoned the water for most. Because there is some fine golf there I think most came away lukewarm and not to the level of Jim Coleman's feelings.
My sense now is that the public golfers I know won't go past Glen Mills if they want an upscale experience. And if they were to go that far they prefer Wyncote. So even Hartefeld rarely comes up in the conversation.
Mike:
Paying $45 for an 8AM Tee Time on a Saturday, I can see Inniscrone competing just fine with any of the above.
-
That will improve their first time play but the test will be whether golfers return. I would be interested in that data.
-
That will improve their first time play but the test will be whether golfers return. I would be interested in that data.
Likewise.
As I mentioned in my first post on this thread, there is a steady set of regulars (that play quickly!) established.
When can I expect you to join me for a round? I still need to see Glen Mills.
-
I understand Glen Mills is 55 until the 15th.
-
My sense now is that the public golfers I know won't go past Glen Mills if they want an upscale experience. And if they were to go that far they prefer Wyncote. So even Hartefeld rarely comes up in the conversation.
Hartefeld is private as far as I know.
-
Maybe I'm getting a little carried away. I've been there three times, none in the last 5 years. I just didn't enjoy it. Maybe I was infuenced by my knowledge that it was built as an upscale, $50,000 initiation private club. (I think the first time I played it they were looking for members at that price.) I thought that was a joke - which it turned out to be. As a $50 daily fee course, I suppose there are a lot worse. Is it wrong to evaluate a course this way? I think it's legit.
-
IMO, Inniscrone is a very good 16 hole course. 10 & 5 are weak holes. As such, it's a very good muni.
It's still more than an hour trip for me so I may make the trip only once or twice per year.
-
Here's the take from the lead dog of a group of 8 that play all the public courses in the area.
" Great piece of land, fun layout but tricky/cutesy difficult with a number of holes that should be blown up. The best barometer is we go there once a year versus Glen Mills and Wyncote 4-6 times. "
My buddies use the cost/fun equation .
-
I understand Glen Mills is 55 until the 15th.
Let me know if you need a fifth
-
IMO, Inniscrone is a very good 16 hole course. 10 & 5 are weak holes. As such, it's a very good muni.
It's still more than an hour trip for me so I may make trip once or twice per year.
Steve, I am with you on the distance factor. Now, you said 5 and 10 are weak holes. I don't see a lot wrong with #5, given environmental or other constraints, and #10 is a means to get from a high point on the course to a low point.
What would you like to see, as far as ideal architecture for these two holes, and these two alone? What would be better designs for holes 5 and 10?
All are welcome to weigh in here, let's keep it constructive from here on out.
-
Doug, et al:
The 10th could be improved with a more interesting greensite. 13 at Lederach would be a model for par fours compromised by wetlands crossings. Lederach's 13th would be very uninspiring, but KBM built a phenomenal, pushed-up green here to make the second shot compelling. Hanse could have done the same thing at 10 at Inniscrone. Build a pushed-up green, relatively large in size, surrounded by fairway. The hole would go from boring to quirky and interesting. To me, the failure on 10 was the green, not the wetlands crossing that seems necessary.
As for 5, I am a huge fan of that drop shot par three. The hole is 110 yards, straight downhill, ending in a green with no surrounding water or bunkers. The hole makes use of interesting ground features and a front-to-back green. The player is free to fly it in or bounce it on. It takes feel, creativity, and mental commitment rather than rote ballstriking ability. I think the 5th is great as is.
-
JNC;
Good to hear from you. I am with you on the 5th hole. I don't think it's a bad hole. It's not a postcard hole, but I do recall some internal contouring to the green, dividing it into quadrants, or thirds, I don't recall (it was about 3 1/2 yrs ago I played w/JB). I think it's effective, in the way the player going after birdie will hit the proper part of the green.
(4th at Lulu is a par 3 of about the same distance, but it plays uphill across a quarry, nobody screams...)
Alternatively, could a different hole be built, on a different part of the property? This way, it eliminates the backtrack.
On to 10.
How would this work with the tees up, specifically, in the driveable range for longer players, and specific to have a sign of the front of hazard/back of hazard distance on the tee?
(This way, people know exactly what the reach and carry distances are, and it serves to hopefully discourage people from having a crack at the green who have no business doing so).
Expand the green pad out considerably--2 or 3 times the current size--rather than a small green ringed by rough to encourage creative second or third shots.
Opinions and intelligent ideas?
-
This is a good thread which I much appreciate. Its these public courses I miss the most about golf in the US. There are so many wonderful courses to be played for less than $75 and a phone call. The US is the ultimate in "why not give it a go?" attitude when prices are kept down and teh variety of courses on offer its kept up. That isn't to say that paying a premium at UK clubs for millionaire golf isn't without its advantages, but it would be great to have a choice. Unfortunately, public golf in the UK sucks.
It occurs to me looking at Joe's pix again that the course reminds me a ton of Calderone Farms in Michigan. That course has many good holes, but somehow fails in how they are tied together. Mind you, I reckon a big part of that is that the course is walkable, but not designed for walkers if you know what I mean. Lederach suffers this same disconnect, but at least there are houses at Lederach.
http://golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,46386.0/
How is the walk at Inniscrone? I notice a heck of a lot of open space within its boundaries and that sets off alarm bells.
Ciao
-
Sean,
I have walked the course but I would think that endeavor is only for the true believer. I do not think it is a problem with distances between green and tee, though there are a few, so much as hills to climb.
As to the aforementioned holes 5 and 10 I would submit that five is not a horrible hole. Forced, obviously, but not comical. As to hole 10, I, like the young Lyon, wonder what the hole would be like with a tee farther down the hill. Also, what is the situation concerning the open space beyond the green? Would it be feasible to move the green up that hill and make is a short par four with a drive across the wetlands and up to a green benched somewhere on the face of that slope?
-
Sean, I've walked Inniscrone many times. Easy walk? Not really. But it is manageable. There are a few tough hills, but no 1/4 mile walks between any green and next tee. Although a couple (the hike back up the hill on the drop shot par 3 5th, across the road to the par 3 8th, and around the bend to the 17th tee) would be nice if shorter, but I don't think the property really allowed it.
Perhaps this could be a topic for a thread on its own, but I think Inniscrone is polarizing for many reasons, clearly a primary one being a couple of controversial holes (in the eyes of the detractors), 5 and 10. And, heck, throw 17 in the mix too. The detractors dislike those holes so much, IMO, that the course is not worth a return play. Those that love the course, like me, accept those holes, AND really love what I think are so many fantastic holes.
If a course has a couple of dud holes, is that enough to put it on your "do not play list", or as Jim Coleman might put it, "should never have been built" list?
-
Walking at Inniscrone? I found it very easy. Kyle and I walked in just over three hours, and I did not feel the least bit tired at the end of the round. There are a couple of hikes and backtracks, but these are very manageable. I thought the road crossing would be a pain, but, as usual, this feature did not have as much of an effect on the routing as I would have figured.
Of the Philly area courses I've played in the last few weeks, Inniscrone was easier to walk. It was an easier walk than Morgan Hill (now THIS is a tough walk), Lederach, Paxon Hollow, Cobb's Creek, or Galloway, no doubt. I think the "it's tough to walk" complaint at Inniscrone does not hold up.
-
I find it interesting that those not from the area uniformly like the course but several from the area aren't enamored.
-
I find it interesting that those not from the area uniformly like the course but several from the area aren't enamored.
Mike,
You said you had members at RG who didn't care for it. As you said, this may have to do with the guest fee assessed. This could also be colored due to, as you said, folks who were members at (for example) RG not liking it (many different variables at work here; distance, architecture, course layout, environmental areas vs. not many at RG). Look, if I could play RG after driving 10 minutes or play Inniscrone after driving 45 minutes, it's obvious which one I'd choose.
Frankly, I liked Inniscrone more than French Creek. Maybe because I played better at Inniscrone than both times at FC (I am working in my mind to not let this distort my analysis of architecture). I feel Inniscrone is less penal than FC, even taking into account #s 4,10, 16, and 17 (I parred 5,16, so I don't think those holes are that hard, and I know a lot of you don't know me for lighting up golf courses. I seem to recall maybe getting out of #4 and 17 with a 5 or 6)
I think a more valid comparison is to look at the other courses of similar stripe, similar age in the immediate area, and look at their architecture, their routing, the ground the courses are built upon.
When this was designed, I imagine it would have competed for members with Hartefeld, Fieldstone, as other newly designed courses. What other courses/clubs would this course have competed with?
-
One thing's for sure: Cobbs Creek has really warped what you Philly guys consider a muni! Inniscrone is nowhere close. Come on.
-
One thing's for sure: Cobbs Creek has really warped what you Philly guys consider a muni! Inniscrone is nowhere close. Come on.
It is owned by the local township! Thank goodness, I say, that it failed as a private course. ;D
-
I had a fun day at Inniscrone (other than having to watch JBausch blast it by me every hole ;)), and thought the course had a number of fun and interesting holes. Yes, 10 felt like a hole I could have created but is 5 really that bad? Maybe growing up with the 77 yarder at Pocono Manor innoculated me but it didn't bother me (other than the backtrap felt odd but how big a deal is that?). And I sure felt like there were plenty of of good holes to make the fun/cost factor a big winner.
Hard for me to believe people dislike the course because of those 2 holes--I must have enjoyed the other 16 much more than others did.
-
One thing's for sure: Cobbs Creek has really warped what you Philly guys consider a muni! Inniscrone is nowhere close. Come on.
It is owned by the local township! Thank goodness, I say, that it failed as a private course. ;D
Somehow I don't think that's what was meant...
-
Doug,
I think that the average person forms their opinion mostly on how they feel while playing a course. Some of that feel comes from a preconceived notion of what makes a good golf course. My discussions with people lead me to believe that conditioning is the number one issue, followed by not being tricked or unconventionality, then how they played and whether it was a nice day. While architecture is involved in these things very few see it as an separate or important item.
I think that the average person can be intimidated into saying they like something they actually did not like much by public opinion or the authority of a revered expert. So, when people hear that Inniscrone isn't that good they are comfortable with their own experience.
GCA guys seem , on average , to go easy on their favored architects.
Why do we make excuses for Hanse when all we can do is play the course that is there?
-
Here are a few observations from my fictional average guy :
#1 scrufty bunkers---why did they put them there?
#2 where do I hit it ? and the green sits down below me wtf?
#3 my wedge didn't hold the green, yo!
#4 too narrow and I busted a drive that went in the crap!!!
#5 I hit a good shot and it went over the green
#7 What's with the bunker right where I want to hit my tee shot?
#10 I think I hate this course
-
Mike, I don't think we always make excuses, although, I do concur with you, if one knows someone personally, it can be easier to make allowances where one would normally criticize. I don't know Gil, but he has been at 1 or 2 of the GCA events at Tom's house most of us here attended. But, it seems like the "favored architects" have the spirit of the ODG courses that we typically enjoy, and work to create courses that make people think. Some people don't want to think, they just want to be rewarded.
Is Inniscrone very different from Applebrook? The aerials look a lot different, IGC looks more similar to FC in terms of terrain and layout than AGC.
Scrufty bunkers? Hmm...they're at Merion, and a few other places, now a lot of Philadelphia courses want bunkers like that now!
Is Glen Mills a lot more "in front of you" than Inniscrone? (I have not been there and am making no comparison)
Inniscrone is definately polarizing. Like Lederach, which is to say, in a good way.
Nobody has really come forward and presented alternative ideas for 5 and 10.
Mike, getting back to your comment on 7 in your last post, I think about this tee shot as the "Ross/Flynn" hybrid strategy I mentioned I think on page 1; that is, you can play to the left off the tee, away from the hidden bunker, and then contend with the bunkers on the 2nd shot. Alternatively, you can play right (and, multiple plays probably will give the player the best line to take here) and, assuming you hit the fairway, have a relatively unencumbered 2nd shot to layup or go for the green. Although, the green axis (from the aerial) seems to point in the direction of the bunkers.
I see what you're saying about "average guy" comments. Steve S shared similar ones from his experiences at Lederach, comments similar to what I received from people I met through GAP as well as other organizations. People are entitled to their opinions.
I concur with you, we can play the course that is there.
-
Here are a few observations from my fictional average guy :
#1 scrufty bunkers---why did they put them there?
#2 where do I hit it ? and the green sits down below me wtf?
#3 my wedge didn't hold the green, yo!
#4 too narrow and I busted a drive that went in the crap!!!
#5 I hit a good shot and it went over the green
#7 What's with the bunker right where I want to hit my tee shot?
#10 I think I hate this course
You didn't help your case with these.
-
Here are a few observations from my fictional average guy :
#1 scrufty bunkers---why did they put them there?
#2 where do I hit it ? and the green sits down below me wtf?
#3 my wedge didn't hold the green, yo!
#4 too narrow and I busted a drive that went in the crap!!!
#5 I hit a good shot and it went over the green
#7 What's with the bunker right where I want to hit my tee shot?
#10 I think I hate this course
You didn't help your case with these.
Yes, they kind of remind of the story I read on here about the guy who didn't like Pine Valley because it didn't have cartpaths. How much does the average golfer know about golf course architecture, and should we even listen to what he has to say?
Note: if you post or lurk on Golf Club Atlas, you are NOT an average golfer.
-
Here are a few observations from my fictional average guy :
#1 scrufty bunkers---why did they put them there?
You see them, stay away
#2 where do I hit it ? and the green sits down below me wtf?
Down the middle, duh
#3 my wedge didn't hold the green, yo!
Don't hit wedge
#4 too narrow and I busted a drive that went in the crap!!!
The corridor is 70 yards wide
#5 I hit a good shot and it went over the green
Then you didn't hit a good shot
#7 What's with the bunker right where I want to hit my tee shot?
Why do you want to drive it in a bunker?
There, I just dropped 5 strokes from your score. A PGA Pro could charge $140 for that playing lesson.
-
I played Inniscrone for the first time over Thanksgiving. I don't think it had gone public until after I left Chester County in 2009. In addition to it being my first Hanse course, it also afforded me my first opportunity to use limited flight range balls and a gasoline cart.
It had taken a beating from the recent weather, most notably in the soft, pockmarked greens. The current clientele didn't seem to bother with repairing ball marks or even divots on par-3 tees. The golf carts made chatting to my playing partner (whom I asked to join me in the parking lot) difficult. I suppose the terrain necessitates them.
That said: I enjoyed the course. It has some quirk, to the extent that it favorably reminded me of Braid Hills in Edinburgh, but I'd go back there in dryer conditions. It took me a few holes to get used to the more open nature of the green sites, where transition from fairway to green didn't seem as obvious as the courses I typically play. I'd walk the next time.
-
I'm curious.
We have a flat in the Morningside area of Edinburgh as my daughter studies Veterinary Medicine at the University there and I have not yet played Braid Hills. Drove up there one day in a gale and looked around.
A bit frumpy was my impression but looked interesting and a strenuous walk but I am always up for that.
Should I give it a try? Also, I am From New York, USA and got the feeling that most players I saw were working class Scots. Worried that I might get paired up with some hostile partners. I have discovered that my Scottish name does not necessarily win over the locals.
It's strange but I would never have the same worry in East Lothain or Fife.
Also, FYI, played Inniscrone ages ago and really liked it. Not a good walking course, however.
-
I'm curious.
We have a flat in the Morningside area of Edinburgh as my daughter studies Veterinary Medicine at he University there and I have not yet played Braid Hills. Drove up there one day in a gale and looked around.
A bit frumpy was my impression but looked interesting and a strenuous walk but I am always up for that.
Should I give it a try? Also, I am From New York, USA and got the feeling that most players I saw were working class Scots. Worried that I might get paired up with some hostile partners. I have discovered that my Scottish name does not necessarily win over the locals.
It's strange but I would never have the same worry in East Lothain or Fife.
Also, FYI, played Inniscrone ages ago and really liked it. Not a good walking course, however.
Malcolm,
Can I ask what your concerns are should you get paired up with a local?
The Braid Hills is a council run course which has at least three but possibly four golf clubs that play over the course. You're right in that the majority of golfers playing at the Braids are "working class Scots" but I'd be very surprised if you were met with any sort of hostility. Let me know the next time you are in Edinburgh and I'd be happy to join you for a round.
Learning the game, the Braid Hills was one of the first courses my father took my brother and I so it has always had a special place in my heart. The conditioning is to be expected of a municipal course, the facilities are limited to say the least and it is quite an arduous walk but once you get to the higher points of the course and get the sweeping views of the city,East Lothian and Fife in the distance you'll be glad you took your life in your hands with the locals.
Michael
-
Malcolm
How does your daughter manage going to and from her flat to the College ? Does she have a personal bodyguard or does she buddy up with other foreigners and upper class Scots to make sure she doesn't get harassed by the lower order ?
With regards to Braid Hills maybe you should try writing to the Council explaining your situation and perhaps they will close the course especially so you could play alone. A bit like the big expensive shops do for VIP's.
Ever helpfully
Yours
Niall
-
Hey wait a minute! I have played many rounds with the locals around Scotland and had a blast! Overall we have found Edinburgh to be exceptionally welcoming.
Have you been to the Grey Horse Inn on Dalkeith Road in Newington? My daughter's prior flat was across the street and I can tell you that wandering in as a friendly American and striking up conversation with the locals did not go over well.
For some reason I got the same vibe watching some of the golfers at Braid Hills.
As for Morningside, no she does not find the mums and prams and the posh oldsters very intimidating.
-
Malcolm
Clearly I was having some sport so don't take it to heart.
Striking up a conversation in a "local" pub can be a bit of a hit or miss affair. I suspect that's not unique to Edinburgh or Scotland.
Re playing golf at muni's, I suspect that Braids is no different to most others in that the golfing etiquette of some might be a bit rough and ready. There are also some who don't want to be paired up with someone they don't know and in that respect muni's are no different than private clubs. As for working class, what does that mean in this day and age ? I might have gone to college/uni and have a degree, am a professional and have an office job but I still have to work to pay the bills so I suppose I'm working class and I'd still be happy to play with you !
In short, give it a go and even if you end up wit some uncommunicative hacker, you can still enjoy the course.
Niall
-
I would say to my Scottish friends and internet acquaintances that I've played golf with Malcolm McKinnon and despite some sideways, untoward glances he gave my worst shots, he didn't beat me up or otherwise physically strike me although it may have been well-deserved at times. ;)
He also has very good taste in choosing pubs and restaurants, so you may consider that to be a plus as well. :)
-
Hey wait a minute! I have played many rounds with the locals around Scotland and had a blast! Overall we have found Edinburgh to be exceptionally welcoming.
Have you been to the Grey Horse Inn on Dalkeith Road in Newington? My daughter's prior flat was across the street and I can tell you that wandering in as a freindly American and striking up conversation with the locals did not go over well.
For some reason I got the same vibe watching some of the golfers at Braid Hills.
As for Morningside, no she does not find the mums and prams and the posh oldsters very intimidating.
In fairness I've spent all of my 31 years in the south side of Edinburgh and even I would think twice about going into the Grey Horse Inn. I don't know if anyone will remember the scene in Trainspotting where the American tourists go into the pub only to be relieved of their belongings but the Grey Horse has that sort of vibe.
-
Michael,
Let's play together next time I am in Edinburgh! Niall, where are you located?
How about some Edinburgh seasonal spirit from just a few weeks ago! I was wandering about the Christmas Fair with a mug of warm mulled wine and a shot of brandy!
I love Edinburgh! Merry Christmas!
(https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5658/23039893264_285a7fdea6_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/B6Xtz3)DSC00654 (https://flic.kr/p/B6Xtz3) by Malcolm Mckinnon (https://www.flickr.com/photos/136618538@N06/), on Flickr
-
Updated album, including changes to the 16th hole.
http://xchem.villanova.edu/~bausch/images/albums/Inniscrone/
-
The changes to the Sixteenth weren't as fatal to the identity of the course as I was afraid of. Some of the teeth have been dulled, but it still holds my interest.
-
Played it yesterday after a dropping off my son for college.
After an interesting couple of weeks of golf including a Hanse redo of Westhampton CC (NY) (loved it), I was disappointed at Inniscrone. Sure Hanse had his signature stuff on the front, but at $38 including cart, the course just can't sustain the amount of play at that price point.
The open farm holes were in fine shape, just a little wet from the recent rain. But the holes in the trees were just beyond the point of playability. I got to the 10th hole after walking the front, and it was really backed up. I looked at grabbing a cart with my partner (who carted the front), but it looked like it was impossible to get around the groups by jumping in front of them. Thus, I bailed on the round.
It was a long week in a good golf way, so Philly defenders, this is not a shot at a Hanse design. Just a reality that not every 200 acre property is good for a golf course.
Doak 3
-
Can you give a rating if you didn't play half of the course? :)
I'd guess 10 was backed up because of the awkward tee shot, but maybe that's just me. It's a shame, you missed out on some fun holes.
Re: some 200 acres aren't suitable, you play the hand you're dealt. I'd agree if it were a mountain and canyon strewn monstrosity - what was that course in Cali that Huck loved (and by loved, I mean hated...)? But Inniscrone is nowhere near that.
One thing is for certain - if Inniscrone is your idea of an average course, I need to hang out with you!
-
Can you give a rating if you didn't play half of the course? :)
Talk to Tom Doak, he made a fortune with cart tours of golf courses !! ;)
Just re-looked at the Doak Scale, and I would change it to a Doak 4.
Not sure when you last visited Inniscrone, but conditioning on the forest holes was a real issue. I played Bethpage Black pre-Rees, and have played Yale for years, so I am pretty open minded about conditioning.
At the end of the day, would 2018-Gil Hanse take on that project? He does not seem like a guy driven by money, so even a big check would probably not bring him back to that property. I was a big fan of NLE-Tallgrass, so I see the features that he was trying to bring to the property.
-
11 thru 16 at Inniscrone are very strong.
-
11 thru 16 at Inniscrone are very strong.
Joe,
The Pope of Ohio says different, BUT your updated image link is broken. Can you re-post? Thanks
PS - Just found this link for the back, is this accurate?
http://myphillygolf.com/uploads/bausch/Inniscrone/index7.html
(http://myphillygolf.com/uploads/bausch/Inniscrone/mediafiles/l59.jpg)
-
Yes, that myphiilygolf link is accurate. I will try to fix that earlier now broken link.
-
Played here for the first time today and after reading through this thread there seems to be mixed emotions. Honestly, I was not impressed and felt a little bit let down after 18 holes. That land is wonderful though, but I had a reoccurring feeling of “this is the best that could be designed with this land?”. Is it awful? No. So there’s that. Not to mention, there are many turfgrass issues there and far too many to list, but shade is a major problem for many greens and tees. Anyway, I may or may not go back. It is a toss up.
-
I wonder changes Hanse would make if he were to go back.