[Matt_Ward]

Andy:

Thanks for weighing in -- you clearly spell out the fact that the course is not as described by the bleacher bums who inhabit the cheap deep left seats and weigh in ONLY through csuspect analysis that comes from the posting of a few photos.

Norman's effort at Red Sky Ranch is well done in my book. The land, overall routing and diversity of holes is all done well. The land is also allowed to "breathe" and not be so overwhelmed by mindless clutter.

What's so funny is that the 1st hole previously pictured has bunkers which only serve to help the player in the event that a bad shot is hit. I don't see that as a negative -- the far right bunker isn't really in play for the better player and if the higher handicap player lands in it they receive the benefit in not going further away from the intended target.

Norman deserves credit for also including chipping areas and other closely mown areas at and around the putting surfaces. Chipping the ball is intended to be tested and it works well in plenty of spots when playing the course.

I am a big fan of the closing holes on both sides -- the 9th at 559 yards plunges downhill as a par-4 and doesn't have any extra bunkers take away what the hole requires. The equally fun 18th plays 590 yards and also plays downhill with a fronting stream for those gambling for the target in two blows. The par-3 16th may also be one of the most striking holes for beauty in all of Colorado -- even though its total length is 280+ yards.

Of all the available courses one can play in Colorado I'd place Norman's layout there easily among my personal top three. It's a rare combination of mind altering beauty plus uncompromising top shelf golf that keeps you executing at the highest of levels.  A rare combo indeed.

Andy -- your final comment on avoiding the TF layout is well said -- although I found the back side on that layout to be much better. The lone solid hole on the front I liked a lot was the short but upjill 8th at just under 340 yards.

[Andy Troeger]

Matt,
I think you describe the features of the course well in your previous post, especially the positive aspects. I tended to like the holes with fewer bunkers better, and a couple of the ones posted originally do drop the course a bit for me, especially #7 with the minefield of bunkers that really only catch an awful shot or a high handicap. Ditto #13.

The nature of the site dictates a lot of sidehill holes as well. I've seen this before at UNM Championship and Broadmoor Mountain. Red Sky Norman does this better than the other two courses, but its still a tad repetitive. The greens were hard as a brick, which meant that only really solid approach shots would hold greens in many cases. For a resort course, this was a bit extreme IMO, as it made an already tough course very challenging. In any though its preferable to the over-watering of many other courses. Even the Fazio the next morning was much wetter so I think the Norman folks have the general idea.

I'd put Lakota Canyon and Cougar Canyon ahead of Red Sky in the Colorado public listing. Redlands Mesa would probably be 3rd then Red Sky Norman.

[Matt_Ward]

Andy:

I'm glad to hear the greens were firm -- too many resorts, facilities of any type keep their greens too soft and as a result the architecture is rendered meaningless.

Norman's Red Sky mandates proper positioning off the tee - you can't just simply hit to any side with the comfort in knowing the ball will stop just about any place on the green. That's what makes the place so special and a clear cut above all other good public golf layouts in Colorado. You also have drop-dead spectacular scenery -- anyone standing on the tee of #16 would be in awe of how Norman and his team captured the moment and feel with that hole and what the background provides to the eye.

You also mentioned sidehill holes as well. Again -- a very solid feature as it requires placement off the tee to the optimum area. Too much of mountain golf in Colorado is not about placement but simply a broad plain vanilla fairway that occupies plenty of real estate. Norman eschewed that ho-hum method and went for the positioning route which his layout at Red Sky optimizes. You then have green sites which mandate different types of shot patterns and trajectories. Witness the many different way the 16th can be played. Ditto the closing holes on each side, to name just two more examples.

Andy, I have already played Cougar Canyon and will opine on it along with a few others in the state later this week. Suffice to say, Norman's Red Sky Ranch is miles beyond Cougar Canyon. Much more solid array of different holes -- plus the nature of the land itself is far more evolved. Cougar Canyon is really devoid of any key land features that separate itself apart from the canyon-pasture land it occupies -- more will follow on that layout. If I were to place the top two public I'd have a considerable discussion regarding the merits of Lakota Canyon Ranch and Norman's Red Sky.

Andy, you mentioned the overall wetness of the TF layout and I concur. Too much H20 is the standard play for too many courses out west. Norman's Red Sky has the elasticity to handle different types of players and when you size up the totality of the land, the sheer diversity of the holes, the nature of the putting and surrounding chipping areas and the incredible beauty of where it's located it adds up for me to be one truly marvelous golf layout of unsurpassed quality.

Anyone who wants to sample high quality mountain golf in the State of Colorado needs to play there. The others are simply support players at best.

[Garland Bayley]

One thing I noticed when I played Red Sky Norman was that only some holes were heavily bunkered (see the previous discussion earlier in the thread). Most of them were in the photos posted previously on this thread (#4, 7, 12, 13 are probably the most overbunkered holes). I also played the Fazio course but agree with those that recommend playing the Norman if one only can play one course at Red Sky.

3rd Hole, long par four downhill


5th Hole, par three. Photo taken from near the 6th tee.


9th Hole, tough par four, from the landing area. Toughest hole on the course, not sure from one play whether I liked it or not. It reminded me a bit of a better version of #18 at Whistling Straits (other than the green), but this one is at least much more playable than that one. Its still pretty tough if you don't hit a fairly long drive in the proper location.


...

So when the hole is not overbunkered it looks as though the solution is to add either ponds or boulders or both. 

[Matt_Ward]

It's always funny when observations come without any direct connection to the course involved. Laziness seems to be a trend with some folks on GCA.

It's also unfair to the courses because these erroneous "tags" and "assertions" can linger when the reality from a personal inspection says so clearly otherwise.

[Garland Bayley]

Hey Matt,

Mike Cirba and Tom Doak told me to tell you that the Greg Norman people could do well to take bunkering lessons from Joel Weiman. (no they didn't really tell me that, but I think there is a good likelyhood it might be true.)

[Matt_Ward]

Garland:

Talking out of your mouth - as opposed to your butt -- is most helpful in any discussion because when you actually do make a personal visit to a course and take the time to play it and see what's been done you avoid coming off as a shoot-from-the-hip commentator.

Have you personally played Norman's Red Sky layout?

Simple question -- yes or no.

Your answer will demonstrate whether you understand what I have said in previous responses on this thread.

[Garland Bayley]

It's always funny when observations come without any direct connection to the course involved. Laziness seems to be a trend with some folks on GCA.

It's also unfair to the courses because these erroneous "tags" and "assertions" can linger when the reality from a personal inspection says so clearly otherwise.

Matt,

If Greg Norman and his group produce such fine golf courses, of which you would have us believe this is one, then why does his name not appear in any of the Golf Digest 100 top courses in the US ever? Even Tom Watson's name appears there, and we both know how few courses he has done. Looking things like that up is just another example of my laziness. 

[Matt_Ward]

Garland:

Allow me to help you with your self-imposed ignorance -- plenty of top courses are not rated by many different magazines. Be more than happy to spell out a few to illuminate my previous point.

There are plenty of courses within Colorado that have not been visited and this happens to other outstanding courses in other parts of the USA.

Botton line is this ...

You have NOT played the place but continue to WEIGH in with couch-potato opinions. Please feel free to continue with your INSIGHTFUL analysis. Each future post on this particular topic only continues to amuse me and others.

[Garland Bayley]

... Each future post on this particular topic only continues to amuse me and others.

Say Matt, what is it that you say you do for a living? 
I do hope I amuse people, especially with my "laziness".

[Matt_Ward]

Garland:

I asked you a simple question -- have you played the course in question or not ?

Earth to Garland -- still waiting for that simple and direct answer.

You tap danced around it and think that continued posting on your insightful comments on Norman's Red Sky Ranch course is really illuminating.

[Garland Bayley]

Garland:

I asked you a simple question -- have you played the course in question or not ?
...

Asked and answered Matt, asked and answered.

[Andy Troeger]

Andy, I have already played Cougar Canyon and will opine on it along with a few others in the state later this week. Suffice to say, Norman's Red Sky Ranch is miles beyond Cougar Canyon. Much more solid array of different holes -- plus the nature of the land itself is far more evolved. Cougar Canyon is really devoid of any key land features that separate itself apart from the canyon-pasture land it occupies -- more will follow on that layout. If I were to place the top two public I'd have a considerable discussion regarding the merits of Lakota Canyon Ranch and Norman's Red Sky.

Andy, you mentioned the overall wetness of the TF layout and I concur. Too much H20 is the standard play for too many courses out west. Norman's Red Sky has the elasticity to handle different types of players and when you size up the totality of the land, the sheer diversity of the holes, the nature of the putting and surrounding chipping areas and the incredible beauty of where it's located it adds up for me to be one truly marvelous golf layout of unsurpassed quality.

Matt,
Look forward to you detailed thoughts on Cougar Canyon. In the long run we'll have to agree to disagree as I also don't think the courses are particularly close. If you mean that being located on the side of a mountain vs land with a canyon running through it I'll take the canyon in this case. Red Sky definitely has the wow factor, but Cougar Canyon works better as a golf course for my tastes.

Lakota Canyon beats either one of them IMO.

[Matt_Ward]

Andy:

Saw your comments -- a few responses.

Jim Engh did overshape a number of holes at Lakota Canyon. Nothing wrong with that in a few spots but the idea of creating a repetitive bowled-in area with high flanking walls -- to a number of the greensites and even the fairways can be a bit much and overwhelm the natural beauty of the site in New Castlle I still enjoy the course thoroughly but when compared to the limited amount of clear shaping that Norman's team did at RSR is something you need to consider.

Driving the ball at RSR is also more daunting because ball position in the fairway can be difficult to contain -- few holes allow the ball to feed off of misses as Lakota Canyon does. Also consider the turning point at the 1st at LCR - it's overly severe and frankly pays no dividend for anyone trying to cut it off.

You also have the overall firmness of the putting surfaces at RSR. They are quite demanding as you originally pointed out and the firmness makes getting close to the pins quite taxing.

Quick comments on Cougar Canyon -- the course is playing way too slow for my tastes -- they are moving forward with keeping the course way too lush -- no doubt to get the grass grown in early on -- but the difference between the tips and the next tee boxes is nearly 1,000 yards and five shot CR differential -- CC needs another tee box offering that plays somewhere in between.

You also have wide fairways that don't require much positioning at CC. One of the better holes there is the uphill par-4 4th. I like the blind shot aspect and the green is neatly angled so one's approach has be exact.

There is duplication of the two long par-3's - similar shot values with little real distinction. I did like the uphill 11th hole -- short but nicely played in the setting.

CC is simply a demanding course with little in terms of land or routing or overall hole diversity to be quite meaningful for a return play at this time for me. I don't doubt it's difficult from certain tee boxes but the sheer elevation of quality design doesn't hold water when compared to what Norman did at Red Sky Ranch. If CC ever gets remotely close to firm and fast then I'd be happy to offer a second opinion. Right now -- no contest between the two for me.

[Andy Troeger]

Matt,
CC was pretty firm when I was there. Its monsoon season now, so maybe they've had quite a bit of rain. It certainly wasn't soft, but I can see how that would make quite a bit of difference. I was very impressed with the conditioning the the way the course played. I can tell you it did not seem wide when it was rolling (some holes were generous, but others not).

I do agree they need a set of tees in the middle. Even a combo set of the existing tees would be fine. The tips are too long for most of us, and then the next set plays fairly short given the elevation.

Lakota does have the repetitive bowl green aspect to it, I agree that's the biggest negative. Red Sky though has EVERY non-par four playing in the same general two directions along the mountain. Yes, if you hit the low side of the fairway you may have problems, but I totally disagree with your "ball position in the fairway" comment--if you use the slope on the high side a good portion of the time it comes back, and if not you're usually very safe. Awkward lies do add to the experience, but talk about repetitive. A couple of uphill/downhill holes other than the par threes might have made things a little more varied. Not to mention that I do agree that at few holes at Red Sky Norman are bunkered to the extreme, what's the point of the minefields on #7 and 13 other than looks and to catch horrid shots or the weaker player. Its a strong course with many good features, don't get me wrong, and probably the most difficult of the three which tends to fit your liking from what I can tell, but not the most fun.

Anyone interested in the financial aspect could also play Lakota, Cougar, and Redlands for the price of one round at Red Sky approximately. I'm not considering that for the architectural comparison, but if I were to choose where to go back it would come into play. Heck, there all good courses.

[Matt_Ward]

Andy:

No doubt the price at RSR is much higher -- I don't see your point in regards to the back and forth nature of the par-4's there. Frankly, it works better than a direct assault that would make for deep plunges and then inane climbs back up.

Cougar Canyon doesn't have the land appeal that Lakota and Norman's layout has. Ditto on the range of holes -- although I see the 16th at CC to be one of the best par-3 holes you can play in all of Colorado. Chris Cochran from the Nicklaus group did a fine job but the level of details and sheer details and complexity of holes is missing when held out to the other two.

Frankly, you need to play Four Mile Ranch in Canon City which I will opine on shortly. First rate public course by Jim Engh and with a bit of a real twist beyond previous efforts.

[Andy Troeger]

Andy:

No doubt the price at RSR is much higher -- I don't see your point in regards to the back and forth nature of the par-4's there. Frankly, it works better than a direct assault that would make for deep plunges and then inane climbs back up.

Cougar Canyon doesn't have the land appeal that Lakota and Norman's layout has. Ditto on the range of holes -- although I see the 16th at CC to be one of the best par-3 holes you can play in all of Colorado. Chris Cochran from the Nicklaus group did a fine job but the level of details and sheer details and complexity of holes is missing when held out to the other two.

Frankly, you need to play Four Mile Ranch in Canon City which I will opine on shortly. First rate public course by Jim Engh and with a bit of a real twist beyond previous efforts.

Matt,
I played Four Mile Ranch on the same trip as Cougar Canyon. I agree its a fine course as well (probably #5 of the Colorado publics I've seen). It was still very early when I played it and it needed a little more time to grow in and could move up my list upon a replay. I like how both that course and Cougar Canyon were built without moving a lot of dirt, both are very reasonably priced as well.

I wonder how the blind shots at 4 Mile will be received by the general public. There are a few wild holes there. I really like #6 with the mostly blind green, I think it works better than #14 with a similar feature. I like the 2nd/15th par fives, but they struck me as being a tad too similar, except the 15th is downhill while #2 is flat. Fun course, and different from Engh's previous efforts in the lack of dirt moved and no bunkers. The middle of the course really shines.

My point on the back and forth nature at RSR is just that it gets repetitive to play holes that only go back and forth. I agree it wouldn't have worked well on that severe of a site to go up and down much, but at the same time its a limitation when a course has 15 holes that are essentially all sidehill and parallel to each other, with the other three holes being par threes. With all that said, its a fine golf course with many strong points that you've pointed out. Its just not my favorite public in Colorado. As you've said many times, the competition is pretty strong.

[Matt_Ward]

Andy:

Four Mile Ranch is a tremendous success for Jim Engh because while it advances his bold usages of contours and clever holes that induce quality shotmaking -- the one thing missing is the overly produced bowl-shaped fairways and greens that were becoming a bit tired from their overuse.

In regards to the blind shots -- I say all of them at FMR were well done and no more demanding than what you experience with blind shots at quality courses across the pond.

Let's talk about holes -- the 2nd is far different than #15 in that the former is likely not going to be reached in two but the latter can be with a quality drive and extremely HIGH and SOFT approach with the second. I played the hole initially with a drive and 7-iron and then played it later that same day and hit drive through the opening (which is no automatic) and one of the features that make it different than the wider landing area you get at #2 - and hit SW from about 120 yards.

The aspect that elevates FMR to a stature comparable to Lakota Canyon Ranch for me is how Engh and company made it a point to use the quality land above the initial holes. The starting holes are good but Engh takes you into the better land for the rest of the round. You have to position drives to get the better angles -- simply beating the big tee shot does little there without sound execution. Engh also successfully included imaginative contours that require pin point approaches. I like that because too many bomb'n gouge players can render holes meaningless simply from hitting the big tee shot. That alone will not suffice at FRM.

In regards to Norman's RSR I can see your point but the totality of the site - both on course views and certainly off-course views, coupled with the unique driving requirements on so many holes -- I really enjoyed the closing holes on each side -- plus the par-3 16th belongs on the short list of best par-3 holes in all of Colorado -- you can throw into the mix with the 16th at Cougar Canyon which is a simple delight to play !

Norman's routing may not have been ideal with sidehill requirements but it does force the player to work a bit harder to get to those optimum places for the best angle. Couple that with the fine chipping areas adjacent to so many of the greens and it makes collectively one of the best public courses I've played in CO. No doubt the length may be an issue for many players but like I have said many times before -- public golf in Colorado is cutting new turf with some exciting layouts. While I am not a fan of Cougar Canyon right now -- I can see the merits of a second visit down the line. For now -- RSR and the new FMR are indeed must plays for the non-affiliated player to keep on their must play list when visiting the state.

[Andy Troeger]

Matt,
I certainly like 4 Mile as well. I hope that holes like #14 are well received, US golf benefits from having that type of unique hole, but I hope it doesn't become a liability issue.

#2 is very much reachable, someone in my group tried it. The green is much more favorable to the approach than #15 which as you mention requires a very accurate shot because it slopes away in spots. They are both good holes, but I think they are more similar  than different even with your descriptions. The drive through the gap on #15 does separate things a bit.

Those looking for affordable golf could do much worse than any of the courses we've discussed (save RSR which isn't affordable but still a nice course). Grandote Peaks isn't far from 4MR and CC  and could also be included.

[Matt_Ward]

Andy:

I'll start a separate thread on FMR because it deserves such discussion.

Regarding the 2nd hole -- it played into a near hurricane when I was there -- the winds did die down to reasonable levels shortly after that.

Just one comment on Grandote Peaks -- be very much interested in on the course is NOW. I've been to the place three times and only the very first visit after it opened was worth the trip. One doesn't go to LaVeta on a whim for marginal turf conditions and a layout that had become stressed out with my last visit.

Last comment -- the green site at #15 is a peach and well done by Engh and company. No matter how far one hits it -- even through the narrow gap the approach must come in extremely high and soft. First rate risk and reward hole that keeps the bomb'n gouge players in check and doesn't abandon the player who can't get there in two strong blows.

[Andy Troeger]

Matt,

I played Grandote Peaks early in the season last year (May 1 range); the conditions for being that early in the season were fine. The grass was a little long and the course was fairly soft, but I think that's to be expected at that time of year.

Its not in the league with the others we've discussed on this thread, but would certainly hold its own with most of the publics in New Mexico that we've mentioned before. I wouldn't fly from the east coast to play it, but if you're passing by on I-25 I'm assuming its rarely crowded and would be worth the quick round by all means.

[Matt_Ward]

Andy:

Grandote was something to behold when it opened years ago --the public competition since then has improved and if all the elements at Cougar Canyon are tied together the reality is that fewer and fewer people will jump over to LaVeta when the option is a good bit better in Trinidad.

[Howard Riefs]

I have time for one round at RSR when we're in Vail for a couple days next month.  Is the Norman course still preferred over the Fazio? 

[Greg Tallman]

Looks like the usual over bunkering and lack of restraint. Several holes look like the COULD be wonderful only to be mucked up by bunkers that are not needed and actually detract from the beautiful natural surroundings. At a minimum they could have been integrated into the surroundings far better and still served the supposed purpose.

[Tom Bacsanyi]

I have time for one round at RSR when we're in Vail for a couple days next month.  Is the Norman course still preferred over the Fazio?  

I've played each a ton (a bit of an insider you might say) and the Fazio is far superior in all areas, IMO.  The three rules for either course on the property are:

1)  Keep it out of the native
2)  Keep it out of the native
3 ) KEEP IT OUT OF THE NATIVE

For me (low single digit) the Fazio has more variety in how the holes can be played (some might whisper there are even some strategic decisions, virtually unheard of on severe mountain properties), the greens are far more interesting with some wings, some plateaus, some tilt, etc. (Norman's are subtle to dead flat), and the scenery on the back 9 is unmatched, especially in the fall.  If I had to play 10 rounds at RSR I'd go with an 8/2 or 7/3 mix.  That being said, the Norman is quite a bit harder (I find the Fazio tips easier than the Norman blues).

I'm still recovering from the shock that RSR made the front page...

Oh, and one more tidbit:   Sonnenalp (Morrish) is my favorite course in the valley.  Wish we had a Doak, C&C, etc. course somewhere around the valley but alas.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()