News:

This discussion group is best enjoyed using Google Chrome, Firefox or Safari.


Matt_Ward

Rustic Canyon v Barona Creek
« on: December 08, 2002, 02:32:03 PM »
I posted this under the thread entitled, "Weaknesses of RC," and it should have been listed separately. Since a number of people are big fans of both courses (myself included), I wonder how those who have played both would assess them against each other.

If I had to decide I'd give the edge to RC. I just think the complexity of the green sites is better and although Barona does have a number of fine driving holes I still Rustic rates a solid advantage.

How do others see it? ;)
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Tommy_Naccarato

Re: Rustic Canyon v Barona Creek
« Reply #1 on: December 08, 2002, 10:11:45 PM »
Matt,
Since I posted a Barona vs. Apache Stronghold thread some months back, I have talked to Todd Eckenrode exactly two times and didn't even get word of his impending nuptials to his wonderful spouse Pam. (Who has kicked my ass on the golf course.)

Truth be told, Todd didn't like my appraisal of Barona, a course I was fortunate to see during its construction and in its most glorious and most perilous of times. (when the course had some major water issues) It's unfortunate, because I do think Barona is a very good golf course, and I do think Todd is a very good golf course designer.

So, Instead of giving my most unabashed opinion of the courses (Barona and Rustic) I will step back on this one.

Matt, you certainly know how to stir it up!:) (this topic could in fact cause WWIII.)

« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

THuckaby2

Re: Rustic Canyon v Barona Creek
« Reply #2 on: December 09, 2002, 07:36:05 AM »
Fellows, golfclubatlas.com WWI has indeed already happened, on exactly this topic, in late April/early May 2002.  Tommy was indeed one of the combatants, and shows the wisdom of Solomon to avoid re-fighting this now.

Given many of us know one or the other of Todd Eckenrode, Geoff Shackelford, Gil Hanse, Jim Wagner personally or electronically, this is indeed a subject that is best touched upon with extreme care if at all.

My take is there both great courses, and VERY different.  That's it.  

Wuss Tom H.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

David Wigler

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Rustic Canyon v Barona Creek
« Reply #3 on: December 09, 2002, 07:36:54 AM »
Ok Matt, what you are asking is which one of my friends has a better-looking baby.  Unfortunately for me, I am dumb enough to answer.

I think Barona has a slight edge.  As you and I have discussed, RC has a weakness in interesting tee shots.  From 60 yards in, the only courses in the world I give a distinct advantage over RC are Prairie Dunes and Cypress Point.  From the tee box to 60 yards, the course can be overpowered and there just are not enough penalties for missing the lines of charm.

Barona has brilliant green complexes as well.  While they may not be at the level of RC, they are certainly top 100 caliber and worthy of study in their own right.  Barona gets the edge overall though IMO because of the interest the course creates off the tee.  Just look at #1 and the penalty for missing the line of charm and ending up in jail behind the tree.  Todd worked a terrific tee-to-green strategy throughout the course and arrived at a far more demanding and slightly more thought provoking golf experience.

These are both solid golf efforts but I must give the edge to Barona.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
And I took full blame then, and retain such now.  My utter ignorance in not trumpeting a course I have never seen remains inexcusable.
Tom Huckaby 2/24/04

Mike_Cirba

Re: Rustic Canyon v Barona Creek
« Reply #4 on: December 09, 2002, 09:19:31 PM »
David Moriarty;

Having never played Barona Creek, I can't comment.

However, your descriptive "non answer" on Rustic Canyon is brilliant!  

I certainly couldn't have said it better and am beginning to wonder;

Is the genius of RC simply the fact that it's so "undefined"?

After decades of modern courses that are "tough, yet fair", "visible", and "strategically obvious", Rustic Canyon seems to turn all of those philosophies on their head in a vague, unsettling, uncertain manner that seems to wear as well as any subtly complex puzzle.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Matt_Ward

Re: Rustic Canyon v Barona Creek
« Reply #5 on: December 10, 2002, 10:05:24 AM »
David M:

Great post and fine non "comparison" analysis. Your discussion of how mysterious RC is while still being utterly playable is a point well taken.

I only raised this thread because comparisons are a part of anything in life. If I had a preference I'd opt for RC, but the margins are indeed close and I don't doubt a counterpoint can easily be raised. No matter what course is favored by one person or others it's clear the golf in SoCal has much to learn from two fascinating designs.

Still believe the complexity of the green sites at RC is indeed something you rarely see at public golf -- clearly one where the green fee is so reasonable.

« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Dan_Belden

Re: Rustic Canyon v Barona Creek
« Reply #6 on: December 10, 2002, 10:33:01 AM »
Tommy N.  
  I know this is off the beaten path, but how does Rustic Canyon compare with Apache Stronghold.  I don't care which is better, just if they have similar feels.  
  I am looking forward to playing Rustic Canyon in January, and can't wait to check out these greens that I have been hearing so much about.    
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Dan Kelly

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Rustic Canyon v Barona Creek
« Reply #7 on: December 10, 2002, 10:38:00 AM »

Quote
Given many of us know one or the other of Todd Eckenrode, Geoff Shackelford, Gil Hanse, Jim Wagner personally or electronically, this is indeed a subject that is best touched upon with extreme care if at all.

Tom IV --

No disrespect intended, but...

That is EXACTLY why the TV announcers don't, as Dave Schmidt puts it, "get it" -- or, if they do get it, why they don't say so.

It's also why they very, very rarely tell us anything really interesting about any of the players.

Better not to ruffle any feathers. Makes life easier -- for the commentators.

Let's not let gca.com become another place where one can't speak one's mind.

Wish I'd played these two courses, so I could say something useful about them.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
"There's no money in doing less." -- Joe Hancock, 11/25/2010
"Rankings are silly and subjective..." -- Tom Doak, 3/12/2016

David Kelly

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Rustic Canyon v Barona Creek
« Reply #8 on: December 10, 2002, 11:53:59 AM »
David Wigler wrote:
Quote
From the tee box to 60 yards, the course can be overpowered and there just are not enough penalties for missing the lines of charm.

I have played Rustic over 30 times and have talked to dozens of others who have played the course and have yet to see or hear about anyone overpowering the course.  Sure Mickelson or Woods could but they can overpower most courses.  

Because of the green contours, the wind, the down canyon effect and the deception caused by the low profile greens and chipping areas, even when coming into the greens with mid and short irons it is not easy to get the ball close.

I would say that the majority of birdies that I have had or seen on the course were two putt birdies but you see very few one putt birdies. There are birdie opportunities [1,3,5,12,13,17] out there but there are other holes that are extremely hard to birdie [2,4,6,9,14,16,18].
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
"Whatever in creation exists without my knowledge exists without my consent." - Judge Holden, Blood Meridian.

David Wigler

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Rustic Canyon v Barona Creek
« Reply #9 on: December 10, 2002, 01:15:25 PM »

Quote

I would say that the majority of birdies that I have had or seen on the course were two putt birdies but you see very few one putt birdies.

David,

You are making the point I am getting at.  One-putt birdies come from precision iron play (Something all of you who have played with me know is the weakest part of my game).  Two-putt birdies come from overpowering the course.  I hit two par fours off the tee and was on the fringe on a third (2 two-putt birides).  I hit two par fives in two and was 5 yards short on the third (2 two-putt birdies).  I made 5 birdies on the round and four of them involved two-putts.  We agree wholeheartedly that the greens are magical and mystical.  Even if I had played the course 20 times, I do not believe that I would know the course anywhere near well enough to make putts consistently.  I am not surprised that the course record is fairly high.  Courses that give up 61's have easy greens and catch a hot player on a day where his iron play is on fire.  Even if your iron play was white hot, the greens would prevent too many putts.  That written, I would suspect almost every player shoots better than their handicap, because almost everyone can two-putt and the course is soooo forgiving off the tee.

Does that make sense?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
And I took full blame then, and retain such now.  My utter ignorance in not trumpeting a course I have never seen remains inexcusable.
Tom Huckaby 2/24/04

David Kelly

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Rustic Canyon v Barona Creek
« Reply #10 on: December 10, 2002, 02:04:04 PM »
David,
What you said makes sense and I understand what your getting at but when I think of a course being overpowered I think of someone going low.  

Lets look at it this way. If the course couldn't be 'overpowered' what would the scores be like?  Lets say #1 was lengthened and #3 and #12 were medium to long par 4s - what would the course record be then? If it is 67 now how many people would have broken 70 in that configuration?

When you write, "I would suspect almost every player shoots better than their handicap" you are getting at the genius of the course.  Yes most people probably do shoot better than their handicap but still the resistence to scoring is surprisingly high.  Isn't that the best combination for a public course?

« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
"Whatever in creation exists without my knowledge exists without my consent." - Judge Holden, Blood Meridian.

THuckaby2

Re: Rustic Canyon v Barona Creek
« Reply #11 on: December 12, 2002, 08:31:21 AM »
Dan:  I guess I'd be a crappy TV commentator.

But I think Dave Wigler has it right - this is asking which friend has a better-looking baby.  There are some places one just doesn't go, where it just isn't worth it to "speak one's mind."

And this is one of them, for me anyway.  Ask me about either of these courses v. Pasatiempo... or either of these courses v. just about every other public course in SoCal... that I'm happy to do.  Just don't ask me to say which of the two is better v. the other.

Besides, this was covered back in the spring to great detail anyway.  There's some good stuff here on this thread, but nothing that wasn't covered back then, really....

TH


Quote


Tom IV --

No disrespect intended, but...

That is EXACTLY why the TV announcers don't, as Dave Schmidt puts it, "get it" -- or, if they do get it, why they don't say so.

It's also why they very, very rarely tell us anything really interesting about any of the players.

Better not to ruffle any feathers. Makes life easier -- for the commentators.

Let's not let gca.com become another place where one can't speak one's mind.

Wish I'd played these two courses, so I could say something useful about them.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Matt_Ward

Re: Rustic Canyon v Barona Creek
« Reply #12 on: December 12, 2002, 09:05:24 AM »
Tom H:

Saw your comments but have to differ.

The point on any thread is not to bash someone personally -- directly or indirectly. The comments on courses, on how they are similar, on how they differ, are all fair game. That's makes GCA worthy.

If people know the players / architects involved they can choose to participate or refrain. It's entirely up to them. I know plenty of architects from my travels and if any of them should have such thin skins or rabbit ears when comments are offered in a fair minded way then I'm sorry for them.

Let me also mention that certain people see little, if any value, in comparing courses. They simply want to look at a particular course and leave it at that. Fine. However, I like to think of myself as a mechanic -- I like to completely break down (not literally) a course and see how each component plays a role with the next. At that point I also like to stack courses up against each other and see what elements each has and those lacking. How courses compare and contrast is indeed interesting stuff to me and when I see two courses of such distinct qualities such as RC and BC it makes me want to listen to others who have also played them and get their candid assessments.

David K:

Regarding the inability thus far for low scores at RC I believe it's important to place that in some sort of context. You have to play the course a few times to have a thorough understanding of what side is preferable when going in at the pin locations.

When you have five par-5's you have very good opportunities for birdies. Ditto a few of the short par-4's. I've said this before -- the complexity of the greens at RC does make you think carefully about where you need to leave your approach. Place the ball in the correct place and birdie opportunities can be had. But, and it's a big "but," you need to play a few times to better develop a game plan that puts you in the "scoring" position that's needed.

On Barona the tee game is somewhat more "intense" than RC but I don't see the greens there being as complex and rigorous as RC. I am not suggesting that the greens at BC are rudimentary and simple. They are not -- as anyone knows from playing the 16th, among just one example, in getting an approach to stay on the green when the flag is cut hard right will attest.

It is truly a plus to golf in the SoCal area to have two courses that present such a wonderful contrast in styles and reaction.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

THuckaby2

Re: Rustic Canyon v Barona Creek
« Reply #13 on: December 12, 2002, 09:10:10 AM »

Quote
Tom H:

Saw your comments but have to differ.

The point on any thread is not to bash someone personally -- directly or indirectly. The comments on courses, on how they are similar, on how they differ, are all fair game. That's makes GCA worthy.

If people know the players / architects involved they can choose to participate or refrain.  

Matt:  I choose to refrain.  I was just trying to explain to DanK why this is so.  

TH
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Pete Lavallee

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Rustic Canyon v Barona Creek
« Reply #14 on: December 12, 2002, 11:08:57 AM »
As a regular customer at Barona Creek, I got a chance to play Rustic Canyon for the 4th time last week. For those of us who are fortunate enough to be able to play both frequently, choosing one is tantamount to telling your two children which one you like the most to their face; some emotional scarring is bound to occur. A direct comparison would be more valid if they were both resort or municipal courses, or if each charged the same. I think what's important is that they both deliver to the customer exactly what they were intended to provide.

Barona Creek fills its' niche as a resort course perfectly. Guests are provided a challanging and exhilerating layout, which can be mastered with limited exposure, provided the player executes. The greens, although far from ordinary, have a much more gradual slope which makes green reading less complicated than at Rustic Canyon. The fairway width accomadates all classes of golfer, and it takes only a few trips around to determine which of the forced carries can be successfully attempted. The yardage book and daily pin placement card provided, leave little mystery to the first time player as to what actually confronts him. Conditioning is in line with the $75 green fees, with the added bonus that the course is maintained firmer than anything within a day's drive.

Rustic Canyon on the other hand provides the ideal continuing challange that players would want from a municipal course, and relies heavily on "defense of par at the green". I have the feeling that this nut will only be cracked with an encyclopedic amount of local knowledge. How long it will take to accumulate this accumen remains to be seen. This only seems to make players want to return even more; to unlock its' many mysteries, in hopes of providing the keys to lower scoring. What strikes me as Rustic's greatest defense is the "down canyon effect". Putts can race away towards the entrance gate with seemingly no reason. This effect is very hard to detect, you can't see it, you don't feel like your standing downhill, and watching your playing partners putts race off the green can be quite comical. I'd be interested to know how the regulars are adapting to this effect; when is the threshold reached for the brain being able to factor this in without telling yourself, watch out this is down canyon? The intricasy of the green sites requires pin point shotmaking, knowing how to use the many slopes and banks to your advantage will take time incorporate. The tightly mowed bent grass aprons cause great indecision, and mastering the right shot to play of these collars, at the right time, will not come quickly. The rudimentary yardage markers and no pin placement guide makes every shot somewhat of a mystery. Trying to  figure out where the pin is located on the 50 yard long 10th green for instance, even from 100 yards out, can be virtually impossible. The pin placements on the front nine can be scouted out when driving in, but the back nine gives less of this opportunity. What more could any muni hack want; a lifetime of challange and discovery, all for $35!
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:12 PM by -1 »
"...one inoculated with the virus must swing a golf-club or perish."  Robert Hunter

Curious JJ

Re: Rustic Canyon v Barona Creek
« Reply #15 on: December 12, 2002, 11:37:27 AM »
Now thats what I'm talken about!!

Give me a man's course. Give me a golf course that makes  me change my shorts off every freicken tee. Yaaaaaaa!!!
The Canyon is too girlyish for a big dog like me. Grip it and rip it and then break your stick over your partners head....are you feel'in me???
I don't need to be doing whole lot a thinking on the tee or fairway or green or at lunch....screw that. This is golf....not a god damn GED test! Black and white, meat and potato, hit it hard, long and straight or else take your medicine girls. Yaaa baby!!! If you aint a little bloody after the round....it aint no fun. Architecture...farchitecture.

Bring it on Biotches!!!
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Dan Kelly

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Rustic Canyon v Barona Creek
« Reply #16 on: December 12, 2002, 11:51:33 AM »

Quote
Dan:  I guess I'd be a crappy TV commentator.

But I think Dave Wigler has it right - this is asking which friend has a better-looking baby.  There are some places one just doesn't go, where it just isn't worth it to "speak one's mind."

And this is one of them, for me anyway.  Ask me about either of these courses v. Pasatiempo... or either of these courses v. just about every other public course in SoCal... that I'm happy to do.  Just don't ask me to say which of the two is better v. the other.

Tom IV --

I wasn't asking you to say which was better. Remember: I'm the guy (one of them, anyway) who's opposed to rankings!

Comparing/contrasting/discussing does NOT require rankings.

« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
"There's no money in doing less." -- Joe Hancock, 11/25/2010
"Rankings are silly and subjective..." -- Tom Doak, 3/12/2016

THuckaby2

Re: Rustic Canyon v Barona Creek
« Reply #17 on: December 12, 2002, 11:58:02 AM »
DK:  It's pretty tough to compare and contrast without saying one course does some aspect better than another, althought Pete L. succeeded mightily!

Beyond this, check your email.

TH
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Mike_Cirba

Re: Rustic Canyon v Barona Creek
« Reply #18 on: December 12, 2002, 12:01:40 PM »
I don't know if I can speak for anyone else here, but I was glad to see the return of "Curious JJ" here.   ;D

I had started to worry that he might have OD'ed on testosterone, but was happy to see that he hasn't moderated or softened in his long absence.  
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Nathan_Huffhines

Re: Rustic Canyon v Barona Creek
« Reply #19 on: December 13, 2002, 01:20:49 AM »
I wish some of you could read yourselves.  Its hilarious!

The way some of you talk you all seem to have this game so mastered to the point that you can bring any course to its knees. Why don't I see the names Wigler, L, and Ward in the stats and anals of professional golf?

I have never seen Barona or Rustic Canyon in person yet, only in pictures. I fear that some of you will take the fun out of it by your descriptions of what you think is challenge or lack of it.

Do some of you have at least some humility?

« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

David Wigler

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Rustic Canyon v Barona Creek
« Reply #20 on: December 13, 2002, 09:42:33 AM »
Nathan,

Congratulations on having the courage to criticize and sign your own name.  You are on of the few.  

Out of curiosity, did you read any of the posts among people you are criticizing?  I felt like pretty honest assessments of RC and Barona were being made.  You will never see Wigler on a tour because I cannot hit irons close to pins and do not have the mental make-up to play under tour pressure (As witnessed every year in my Michigan Amateur choke).  That written, I do play 70's golf (Tour players play 60's golf and over four rounds, that is about 40 strokes difference).  I certainly hit the ball as far or farther than the average tour player and on a course like RC, I would expect to make 4 or more birdies every round.  I also will make several double bogeys and offset those birdies.  

One of the great features of GCA is honest assessment of golf courses.  If you feel that comments like "A solid power game can overwhelm this course" are ego and hubris and not honest assessment, then I suggest you simply read your local golf magazine (Matt Ward's excluded) where all they do is compliment the courses that pay advertising dollars.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
And I took full blame then, and retain such now.  My utter ignorance in not trumpeting a course I have never seen remains inexcusable.
Tom Huckaby 2/24/04

Matt_Ward

Re: Rustic Canyon v Barona Creek
« Reply #21 on: December 13, 2002, 10:23:31 AM »
Nathan:

Appreciate you coming forward, but let's clear up some misconceptions you present. I have been humbled no less than anyone else playing this grand game. I never referenced the courses as being easy. I also never referenced my play at either course by score. When I rate a facility I'm busy playing several shots from different areas of the course in order to see what's been provided by the architect.

You've never seen me play and I have certainly never seen you play. I know that I do hit the ball a decent ways off the tee and have played competitive amateur golf for quite a few years and have qualified for USGA Championships. I am not and have never alluded to my playing skill, shall I call it that, as being tour related or anything close to that. However, if I happen to drive some of the short par-4's and reach the longest of par-4's at Rustic with a 9-iron or PW that's a fact not hubris.

Just to fill you in Nathan -- I relish playing courses from the back of the tips. If you ask people who know me I enjoy seeing courses that are well designed and provide MAXIMUM challenge. I have also tried to expand my horizon by listening to those on GCA who look at the golf experience in being many things. Those type of comments have helped me, I believe, see more to the game than simply the challenge element.

I made no claim that I conquer these types of challenges though. However, I do know in having played Rustic and Barona what shotmaking requirements are expected and have provided my candid thoughts based on having served as rating panelist for a major golf pub for 17 years and in doing my fair share in visiting courses across the country. The opinions are mine -- no one else's. You, and others, are free to express your thoughts and disagree.

You frankly admit you have never played either course, however, you quickly point out that somehow what has been said by myself and David Wigler will lessen the experience for you and others like you. That is rubbish. Both courses are well done and I dare say you will find them most rewarding. However, the purpose of GCA, as David correctly pointed out, is to put courses under the microscope and provide STRAIGHTFORWARD NO-HOLDS BARRED analysis. If you want the fluff and drivel that many publications provide simply go to your local newstand / bookstore and pick one out.

Rustic and Barona will give you much to enjoy and I would be interested in your comments AFTER you play them. But do me a favor -- I know what I did when I PLAYED the courses in question and the wide range (and skill level) of people who have weighed in thus far provide the type of discussion that GCA exemplifies.

To borrow a Covey phrase -- seek to understand before being understood. ;)
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

David Wigler

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Rustic Canyon v Barona Creek
« Reply #22 on: December 13, 2002, 12:07:55 PM »
I wish I was surprised.  
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
And I took full blame then, and retain such now.  My utter ignorance in not trumpeting a course I have never seen remains inexcusable.
Tom Huckaby 2/24/04

Nathan_Huffhines

Re: Rustic Canyon v Barona Creek
« Reply #23 on: December 13, 2002, 01:25:31 PM »
This is the second time my name has been called in to question as to who I am. The last time I checked my drivers license it did in fact say Nathan Huffhines, so I guess I'm still ok with my real identity.

I too have seen Raising Arizona and was just as equally amazed by the late Trey Wilson's character as well as his name. It was a great flick. However, and I will say this for the last time, my name is Nathan Huffhines, no relation to Hart Huffines. I have never met him and our names are spelled differently, no doubt from some error at the check-in counter at Ellis Island Hotel & Golf Resort.

My comments weren't meant to insult, more to hilight the way some of you might perceive yourselves in relation to your golf game which I wish that some of you would go back and reread your own posts to hopefully see what I'm talking about.

I wonder how the length and driving challenge Rustic Canyon would be for you if you were using equimpment that didn't add to the ego.



« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:12 PM by -1 »

George Pazin

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Rustic Canyon v Barona Creek
« Reply #24 on: December 13, 2002, 01:57:58 PM »
Nathan -

Sorry to see the confusion about your name - hope it doesn't stop you from posting more. People were/are still skeptical about Charlie Rymer posting on the announcer thread, too, so you're in good company.

In regard to your criticism of Messrs. Wigler & Ward, I will admit that was my first thought when I read their comments re: overpowering Rustic Canyon. However, I have read enough of their posts to understand that they are hypothesizing about how courses such as Rustic would hold up under the attack of people like Tiger, Phil, etc. Though I tend to fall under the camp of Tim Weiman (ie. courses shouldn't be designed be .0001% of the golfing population), their criticisms are certainly worth noting.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
Big drivers and hot balls are the product of golf course design that rewards the hit one far then hit one high strategy.  Shinny showed everyone how to take care of this whole technology dilemma. - Pat Brockwell, 6/24/04

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back