New "old" course and change of plans

[Hacker James]

I was going to play Mt Woodson tomorrow but decided to stay closer to home. I looked up Meadow Lake Golf Course in Hidden Meadows (Escondido) and lo and behold, they changed their name to "Boulder Oaks". They were closed for an entire year and re-did the entire course. It looks a little wierd in that a couple of the par 5's are very short, like 370 Yards!  It might even be a links course, but I did not study it that close, just from some of the photos.  I am amazed at the distance on those par 5's, but maybe there is something I have not found out about them yet.  I will certainly let you know.  The green fees are very, very good.  I will be paying $33 including a cart at prime time in the morning 8:52.  Early bird rounds start at $29. You really can not beat that hardly anywhere in the county for a regulation sized course. Given, it is not all that long from the whites at 67.3/119 but there are two longer tees, blue and black,  with higher ratings and slopes accordingly. I am looking forward to it, and its only about 5 miles from my door and do not even have to get on the interstate.   I am a little "stoked" which is unusual for me.  That and the S.O. is in Vegas (by herself) to meet up with her daughter, so I have a entire weekend of freedom!  er....better say  "solitude" to be P.C.  for any ladies reading this.

[bkuehn1952]

36 minutes ago, Hacker James said:

...Given, it is not all that long from the whites at 67.3/119 but there are two longer tees, blue and black,  with higher ratings and slopes accordingly...

Enjoy the new "old" course.  I have to think the course ratings are a bit off.  The "Black" tees measure 5,726 yards (meters?) yet they have a course rating/slope of 72.3/129.  That seems rather high for the length.  Maybe you will discover the reasons.

[Hacker James]

yes, from first glance, several things just did not make a lot of sense., we shall see.

[Hacker James]

well, had a little time to take a closer look at the course photos and reviews and it does NOT look good! Terrible reviews, photos, show sparse grass, lots of graded areas. Hopefully they are old photos and it has improved. Only 2 of the reviews were 5 star, the others range 1 - 3.  It was a decent course before, we can only hope it is not too disappointing.  Oh, well...at least if it is truly bad, I can cross it off my list.

One thing about San Diego County, you could play a different course every day in the month. I can always play a better one on Sunday to get the bad taste out of my mouth.  (Kinda of like clearing the palate during wine tasting).  Problem is, I seem to score lower on the better, albeit more difficult courses. I don't know why that is,maybe more focus as I know one needs to be careful.

The short par 5's are still a mystery yet to be solved.

[bkuehn1952]

Well, no matter what the quality of the course, my guess is you will have slightly better weather than we expect for the next 5 months.

[Hacker James]

43 minutes ago, bkuehn1952 said:

Well, no matter what the quality of the course, my guess is you will have slightly better weather than we expect for the next 5 months.

 

Sorry, bout that. I sometimes forget what the wx is there. I have  relatives living in the upper peninsula (Metamora) and I was born and grew up in Ohio.

 

 

[Hacker James]

follow up for any that are the least bit interested......Course is not all that bad. Lots of waste areas were created, which make it resemble a wannabe links course. Some golfers do not clear the waste area. The greens were nice, a little fast. The rating and slope have been changed from what is shown online. Course still plays short. The par 5's are a joke, but even so, it is not an easy course.  I shot an 85 and would have broken 80 if I sunk more putts. no doubles though and I had a few GIR.  The fairways were deep grass, freshly mowed, but I think they were allowing the grass to grow out. Easy to take divots.  I would play it again. 

[Hacker James]

Note to self.   My index is going to go up even with that low score of 85 since the rating and slope is so much lower. I guess I need to start shooting more lower scores.

[No Mulligans]

A buddy of mine texted me to invite me to play Vineyard tomorrow morning.  Then I got a later text that they messed up and made the tee time for three instead of four so they changed where we are playing... Boulder Oaks tomorrow morning.  Never played there under either of the names.  What a coincidence.

[Hacker James]

Hope you are riding. They do have walking rates, but I do not recommend it.  Play from the tips, or at minimum blues. A couple of holes is a decent drive off the tee box to clear the waste areas, although even they are not bad, consisting of sand, dirt, a little chaparell or cactus like plants. Fairways are soft, grass clippings deep, easy to lose a ball in plain sight. I think you will find it a fun course though. Beware the elevated holes, the greens look flat, but if you go past the pin, they are extremely fast rolling back down. Just barely tap the ball and you will be okay. Take advantage of the Golfer Meal Deal. $10 for burger fries and domestic beer. The burgers are double patties and quite good (if you like burgers).  No driving range, but good putting greens. Cart barn is a hike from the pro shop, you can either park near there and walk to the pro shop, or park out front near the entrance and have to walk to the cart barn.  On 18, aim towards the rocks on the left, but avoid going in! A high fade works well here.  Bunkers are easy.  Good Luck, and above all HAVE FUN!

Edited October 29, 2016 by Hacker James

[David in FL]

So, explain the 375 yard par-5's...!

[Hacker James]

2 minutes ago, David in FL said:

So, explain the 375 yard par-5's...!

well, I can not see any explanation that makes sense. They are not particularly difficult. No unforeseen hazards, no water. I asked in the pro shop and he said that the course was completely redesigned and that the old course had received complaints about being too difficult. I asked if the course had actually been rated and he assured me that it had by USGA. I am not sure I believe it. The score card shows different ratings: Black 67.3/116 5726 yds, Blue 64.5/110 4943 yds. White 62.0/103 4377 yds and Gold 59.4/96 3774 yds. He said at first he thought that maybe they had used the old course ratings. The longest hole on the course is 540 yards. However, the longest par 3 is 218.  They had several of the tee boxes bunched together. I guess they are trying to save wear and tear. It looks to me as if they opened up the course too soon, it is still over-seeded. It is interesting though, as most of the waste areas are in front of the fairway. Like I said a "wannabe" link course.  I would call it "target" oriented golf course. There are over 60 tee boxes, but many not marked/not used.  It actually plays a bit harder than the ratings and slope indicate.  The scenery is very nice though from the mountain tops. I would consider it a novelty course (for now).

[Hacker James]

@David in FL not to beat this to death, but I am thinking one reason for the variances is their wanting to offer tee options without thinking it through. They wanted to shorten the course, but they should have just eliminated all but 2 tees choices.  They do not even refer to a "woman's par", maybe a modern day P.C. consideration.

Edited October 29, 2016 by Hacker James

[David in FL]

Weird.  Can you link to a website for the course...or a scorecard?

[Hacker James]

14 hours ago, David in FL said:

Weird.  Can you link to a website for the course...or a scorecard?

try this: http://www.boulderoaksgolfclub.com    it is same score card, but the ratings/slope online are not same as actual. see my prior message for correct slope ratings.  Link does not work all the time, but it is boulder oaks in Escondido, CA

[iacas]

14 hours ago, Hacker James said:

try this: http://www.boulderoaksgolfclub.com    it is same score card, but the ratings/slope online are not same as actual. see my prior message for correct slope ratings.  Link does not work all the time, but it is boulder oaks in Escondido, CA

https://ncrdb.usga.org/NCRDB/courseTeeInfo.aspx?CourseID=9406

67.3/117 from the "Black" tees. Those seem about right, but the ratings on the card are a flat out joke:

This course is near me here and is just under 6000 yards: https://ncrdb.usga.org/NCRDB/courseTeeInfo.aspx?CourseID=41434 .

[Hacker James]

22 minutes ago, iacas said:

https://ncrdb.usga.org/NCRDB/courseTeeInfo.aspx?CourseID=9406

67.3/117 from the "Black" tees. Those seem about right, but the ratings on the card are a flat out joke:

This course is near me here and is just under 6000 yards: https://ncrdb.usga.org/NCRDB/courseTeeInfo.aspx?CourseID=41434 .

The actual card at the pro shop is different. It is exactly like the first set of tee's in the USGA link you provided. Question: Why does the USGA have two different sets of ratings i.e. black/blue/white/gold  and then it repeats with entirely different ratings?  edit:  "oops" now I see, one for male the other set for female

Edited October 29, 2016 by Hacker James

[No Mulligans]

I'm looking at the card I got today right now and it says the rating from the blacks is 67.3/116.  We played from the blacks which was suggested by @Hacker James.  One thing I didn't like from the blacks is on many (maybe most) of the holes you can't see the landing areas.  From the whites it's a 62/103.

This is a course where one can expect a lot of penalty strokes as it is a narrow course with OB and/or hazards on both sides of pretty much every hole.  I had 7 penalty strokes, two times I couldn't find my ball when I thought it should be in the fairway and it might have been as the grass in the fairway was high enough in many places for the ball to disappear.  The tall fairway grass from the overseeding and the many blind shots make it a challenge to find ones ball. Those stroke and distance lost ball penalties accounted for 4 of my penalty strokes.

I enjoyed the course and the price. I would play there often if it wasn't so far away (36 miles driving distance from my home).