Golf Sim Clubhouse Forum

Course: Eiderdale (36.4 MB)
Type: Fictional, Parkland
Designer: Blakeley
Date: 11/25/2011
Images: Sp, #10, #11, #16
Libraries Used: fall

This is Blakeley's second course, and at first glance it's just another "vanilla" course; simple planting, nothing fancy, but a nice flavor to it. It sure didn't play that way for our threesome. We played the f9 on l/w/b and the back on l/n/g. The course was today's winner; Jack shot -2/-2; Gary shot -3/+7 and I shot +1/-1. (Did I ever tell you I hate wet greens?)

Blakeley doesn't use a lot of water or sand, but they seem to be in the exact place necessary to catch a short shot. Using (I think) the BDR library, the rough is tenacious and it's tough to get out of. I really liked the greens; a lot of movement and very few pins without some break; in fact I can't think of a straight-in putt shorter than 4' (and I only had a couple of those, mostly my second putt.

The course work itself was nicely done; the traps and lips were well done, no wrinkles, no spikes on the greens that we found. This is a nice second effort.

Just finished playing this new release. I pretty much agree with everything Judy said. I did find one spike on the back fringe of #12, 15 feet from the pin. This feels and looks like an early PGA 2000 release but everyone should give it a try. The greens them shelf are very well done.

I wanted to thank Judy and Steve for taking the time to download and play the course, then taking the time to give it a review. I wouldn't be able to improve my designing skills (or lack thereof) otherwise.
I wanted to thank Judy for her observation about my bunkers- you're right, I have a tendency to place them for the short shot, but not necessarily the long shot off the tee or on the approach. Thanks for pointing that out, I'll definitely put a few more long-shot bunkers on my next project. I'm a sparse bunker designer by choice. Sometimes it seems (to me, anyway) that errant shots out of the rough are tougher than bunker shots, except perhaps when the ball is buried in the sand- hence my Spartan placement of traps around the errand tee shot. Also, good eye, I did use the BDR textures on the course.
This is the second course out of two that has been commented on as being "Vanilla"; I realize this is neither a criticism or a compliment so much as it is an observation. It's quickly becoming apparent to me that this is my greatest design weakness, and if anyone could point me in the right direction of a more chocolate or strawberry look, I'd greatly appreciate it as I'd really like to get my skills up to the 'B' or 'A' list caliber.
I'm not as good a PGA 2000 golfer as some of you, but I found this course challenging to golf and my average score while play-testing ranged from -2 to +2; the front nine giveth, while the back nine taketh away.

Thanks again for everyone's comments, criticisms and general help.

Cary.

I enjoyed it. Not being too good at this game, I did find it a good challenge with narrow fairways and the water placement. The 11th can make one think, off the tee the first pond is just the length of an average shot. Aiming to miss it could put one in difficulty with the water further down, depending on conditions. Have played a few rounds, scores ranging from +6 to +15.

Edit: I should have said a couple of narrow fairways. Also the 14th, same with the water placement, that little bit of water looks small enough, but superbly placed.

Joe, I just want to point out that neither my "short" bunker comment nor my "vanilla" comments were intended to be critical. "Vanilla" has been a term that I've used descriptively for years; and I'll just add that there are a lot of "vanilla" courses that are excellent "A" list courses that I've played numerous times over those years. Dano Bunch's Dallas Athletic Club and Pyecraft's White Fox Woods are two examples. It means that though it doesn't have the fancy planting, flowers, fences, etc. that do tend to "gussy up" a courses it doesn't mean it's not French or natural vanilla... if that makes sense. Sometimes a trap or tree placed at just the right spot (or wrong spot!) means more to the challenge and playability of the course than a 100 acre woods. To be honest the only type of planting that bothers me is where you have a row of trees next to the fairway and green, then nothing until the next complex. Your "sprinkles" of trees, shrubs and groves gives a nice complete look to the course.

When I'm placing traps, I do try to keep it in mind two types of players: Those that average in the 240-270 range (like me) and those in the 270-300 range (like Jack.) I try to present some challenge to both types of hitters, like say a big hitter might carry the 270 yard trap, but if he's too far left (or right) and too long he may have a tree(s) to deal with. I personally have a tendency to use a lot of traps because I know how darned good these guys are at getting up and down from the rough and traps just add another variable. The main point though, IMO, is not to punish a good shot or to leave an out somewhere down the fairway.

I thought you did an excellent job with your greens, which are still the hardest thing for me to build of anything on the course. Yours had lots of breaks and good ups and downs without being too sloped and they were definitely not too flat. You did well with your sparing use of water also; those front-and-back made the approaches challenging, and that damned hazard front left, side right and rear #14 really ate us up. Overall this course is a big improvement over your first design. I think Steve said it well, that you have to keep in mind that you're building an 18-hole course not just 18 golf holes. If you can visualize an existing piece of land that you're building a course on, you're well on your way to being a first rate designer, and I think you've shown that you have the ability. I hope this sounds more encouraging.

Judy,

I realize that your comments weren't critical by any means, so, no worries, its all good. You gave an honest opinion. In fact I'm grateful for your observations, especially where bunker placement was concerned. Had you not mentioned it, it would never have dawned on me that I had a tendency to place traps almost exclusively for the short shot. Sometimes i get too wrapped up with the bigger picture of design and miss the small stuff. Its players like you that help me to be a better designer. So, kudos and thanks and please don't stop commenting.


I looked for the spike on #12 that was mentioned in an earlier post, and i batted the ball around behind the green for about a dozen shots without finding it.

Thanks,


Cary

I would agree with all that has been said here. The placement of your water and bunkers off the tee were very good. The greens were nicely done. Just a good basic course. Definitely an improvement over your first course. Thanks for your time and effort to keep this game alive.

I just wanted to add how much I really liked the short water-long water right on #11. It presented a nice risk-reward situation: Lay up short? Drive over the water left and risk going into that nasty rough long or possibly pushing it right into the water? Aim right and risk pulling into the short water or going into the long water? Missing the whole darn fairway and going into that velcro? Playing on gusty really made it interesting.

A good design for just this designers second course. One mistake I usually find with new designers is that they don't understand that water is suppose to be FLAT. Thats why we have a flatten tool in the CA. Do a right click and drag your cursor accross the water features and you will see that they are not flat. The elevation should not change. Also some of the water features , ( dont remember which ones) had sounds associated with them that you would normally associate with ocean water crashing upon the beach. Not appropriate for a water pond. The selection of houses was dissapointing . It looks like they came form maybe the Sahalee library. Far better selections are available with a little searching. Bullock Run has a good selection. The clumps of tan/brown grasses used through out the course seem out of place to me on this course. Plantings are thin at best. Gives the course an unfinished look. I think the use of a fall pano would have improved the overall look Dont understand the thinking of using cute triangle shapped tees. Dont think I have ever seen that on a real course. I think the bunkers were well done, especially the bunker lips. However , Indy is right in her post where she talks abut adding some fairway bunkers fairly placed at different lengths from the tee . Some for the short hitters and some for the long hitters. My observations are not ment to be critical of your work but rather to help you see your work as others see it. Overall a very good effort and looking forward to your next design. Best of luck , Spencer.