My understanding is that the Scarlet and Gray courses are some pretty killer places to play golf.
UM Golf Course one of the best
Gray is pretty much your run of the mill golf course and there is nothing too special about, Scarlet is f&#%# awesome though and is tough as hell.
As an 18 handicap, I have shot in the mid 80s on Gray but can't break 100 on Scarlet.
to be an 18 handicap. But I suck. I can hit any shot on the course perfectly, but then every OTHER shot on that hole sucks.
Tell me this: Is there a lot of water or deep grass? I'll play any course, but I need to know if I should bring one box of balls, or 5. My shots like to go swimming/hiking.
feel of a couse until you play it from all angles and grass types. That whole "play in the middle of the fairway" thing is sooo boring.
and don't forget that Leslie Park up on the north side of town was rated #1 muni in the state of Michigan by Golf Digest for 09-10;
Were both designed by MacKenzie, the guy who helped Bobby Jones design Augusta.
Our course is a blast to play.
Yes, thankyou. MacKenzie trumps Nicklaus every time. However, there are so many things wrong with our golf course (referring to U of M not Radrick) these days its just sad. I played this golf course nearly every day for 4 years and quite simply they are ruining this golf course.
- The random placement of new trees on 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 12, 13, 14 & 15. The golf course was never intended to have trees like it does. There are plans hanging in the team meeting room at the golf course that show this. The trees they have added ruin design aspects of many of those holes which changes the strategy of the course immensely - and not for the better.
- The removal of sand faces on bunkers on 5, 8, 10 and more to come. In order to make it easier to maintain the bunkers, they are lowering the lips of the bunkers on many holes so that no hand raking is required. With the undulation of many holes that require uphill approaches, this changes the look of bunkers to the point where one might not know it even exists. This is more of a visual change than physical as to how the course plays but it ruins the look of 3 holes.
- Buckeye trees line the right side of the 9th hole. BUCKEYE TREES SHOULD NOT EXIST ON OUR GOLF COURSE.
- We use a RED, white and maize flag system for hole location identification. Our golf course should also never have RED flags. Why not some combination of Maize, Blue & White?
- The cutting of the cups is just miserable and was for each of the 4 years I was at school. They routinely fail to cut the cups deep enough which leaves the metal rim of the cup at about one centimeter down rather than the standard one inch. Consequently, lip outs are brutal because balls that are supposed to go in do not as they bounce off the metal rim. I have even seen balls bounce back and out towards where the putt came from when they are center cut and rolling at a good holing speed.
- The greens are WAY TOO SLOW. They never verti-cut them, and U of M does not even own a roller.
- The fairways are WAY TOO LONG --- it is honestly like playing out of the first cut of rough at many courses. People catch fliers from the middle of the fairway. As a team we used to be at a disadvantage when we went to tournaments where the course had tight fairways just because the ball would sit up so high at U of M we never played off of lies representative of other courses.
All that being said it should still be in the Top 10. The course is a gem but they are ruining it with every passing day. As for the OSU courses. The gray sucks, and is not worth playing. The Scarlet course is just plain hard but really not that great. It is in good condition but the design is pretty bad. They took a MacKenzie masterpiece, handed it to Nicklaus, and let him ruin it. I played with Tom Lehman (who played for Minnesota) in U.S. Open Sectionals there in 2007. He had played there before the redesign and after 9 holes he looks at me and says, "I have a hard time believing this is the best he [Nicklaus] could do with this course. I just don't understand why he changed some of things he did."
EDIT: The men's team is hosting NCAA regionals in 2012 which is very positive for the program. Many people think the golf course is not hard enough but hopefully they will at least get it in good shape for that event because the handful of times when the course has had some rough in addition to playing firm and fast, it has been pretty difficult because you have to be so precise to score low.
upsets me, since in the 90's the whole revamp was to remove trees and bring it closer to McKenzie's original design. UM is a bit short for most college golfers these days.
Also I played OSU before the redesign, and it was a great, tough golf course. Haven't been back to play the redesign and have heard mixed reviews.
about this subject a while back, and his thoughts mirror yours. Wouldn't it be a wonderful thing, to get Devries and/or Tom Doak for another restoration of the golf course?
Devries told me an interesting story; that Art Hills' construction foreman needed some help for several days during the UMGC renovation, and he brought Mike in for some work, for which he was vastly overqualified. So Devries knew exactly what he was talking about, having worked with Hills' crew while they were doing the work. (He had some interesting thoughts about the size and shaping of the Number 6 green.)
Doak or Devries would be amazing. I almost pursued an internship with Doak's design team last year before deciding to try to qualify for the PGA Tour. Either of those guys would be the perfect fit to redesign U of M. As a fanbase/golf community/athletic department/university we have taken this course for granted for far too many years and if the trend continues without intervention, the course will lose its appeal.
As to the comments above. This golf course is NOT too short for college golf. It IS too easy when the course is soft and slow, which it is all but 1 week of the year when the men's team hosts their home tournament. When the greens and fairways are running firm and fast and the rough is up a little, to score well the course demands absolute precision because of the design features of the fairways and green complexes.
Bill I am just happy that so far, they have managed to "do no harm." Devries disagreed with me somewhat on that topic, but I may have convinced him otherwise.
MacKenzie is better than Nicklaus. MacKenzie, Ross, and Tillinghast have the best course designs. That era was the golden age of golf course architecture. I completely disagree with the way golf courses are being made these days. There are plenty of ways to make a golf course challenging without making it 7400 yards (like Augusta has done), such as narrowing fairways, more strategic bunker placement, making the greens more difficult, etc. Just because a golf course is shorter doesn't mean its easier and visa versa.
was a Pete Dye design.
Another historic hire by a U-M AD.
I had issues with Radrick when it was first built; Pete came back, 30 years later, and cleaned up his original design.
I think Eisenhower Blue at the Air Force Academy is way too low... I'd put it Top 10 easy. It's basically The Broadmoor course, just, you know, affordable. Plus, that Colorado Springs altitude puts at least 10% more on your irons, which makes for an enjoyable day at the links.
I played there everyday, except the winter, for four years and the course is almost always in perfect shape and the greens are amazing and tough. New mexico's course is pretty sweet to but is rarely in good shape and should be way lower on this list.
have you played the Kirtland course in Albuquerque? I've heard good things since a supposed redesign a couple years ago.
I actually haven't played that course, one of my buddies who is a really good player stationed there said it was terrible but that was a couple years ago so it might be better now not sure.
Scarlet is one of the hardest college golf courses and i really would like to play it except i dont want to go to Columbus.
Whichever course is the one right across from the stadium is tough. I'm not a great golfer, but I put up an especially bad score at that course. I even shot better the one time I played Oakland Hills.
The Kampen Course at Purdue is pretty sick. I played in a national Jr. tournament there about 5-6 years ago and it was amazing. Not really that hard, but very well kept. Also, my college roommate did an internship at The Legends course at Vanderbilt and he said that was really sick too. Both courses there are in the top-30. Anybody know what the greens fees at UofM are?
Yes, the Staduim course is one of the best, but what of UoMs Radrick Farms Golf Course?
I seem to recall it being much more of a challenge.
To #1 posting: Regarding the last line about Jack I have to pose the following question... Who holds the record at the Stadium course?