Divot Master

Stayed at 9.0.

Or if the captain and his team had focused last week on learning the course instead of kicking off silly season in the Bahamas.

It's Fatrick we're dealing with here, let's call it the Waist Area.

I was a member there for a while and played frequently through the 1980's and somewhat since then. The fish hatchery was in the area left of the 12th green and behind the 13th tee. When the course was first built it was long, wide open, and only about 8 lakes. Each off-season, the owner would go out on his grader and dig a few more. At a point somewhere between 30 and 60, it became ridiculous, and by 100 it was absurd. Then an outside operator came in, renovated the course, rerouting several holes, and filled in some of the sillier ponds. The course played well until the early 2000's, when the original developer passed away, and his sons showed little interest or skill in maintaining it.

A bottle of 12 year aged Jamaican rum and 4 shot glasses. You never know when you might need to celebrate a good shot.

Maybe an exaggeration, but with nearly 100 water hazards on the course (and many that come into play on more than one hole), there were frequently 4-6 water hazards that could come in to play on a given tee or fairway shot. The course designer used small ponds like others would use sand traps. Edit, this was referring to the thunder hill comments on the previous page.

First picture WW #14 from the Blue tee, 180 yds, note three traps on the left and one on the right. Second picture from behind back right corner of the green, note 4 traps on the right, with the closest one being 12 yards behind the green and not visible from any tee. Also notice 7:30 pm and not a single rake mark or footprint in the trap. Even curiouser, the trap appears on Google but does not appear in the SkyCaddie hole image. Like Iacas, I have never been in this trap (and I have been a member here for six years).

The bunkering on that hole is similar to the bunkering on the fifth hole. The difference is that on 5, the rear bunker is right up against the green, but on 14 there is about a 10 yard gap. I am aware that the course architect passed away prior to the shaping of the back nine, it is possible that what the guy on the grader did was not quite what the architect had drawn. For the most part, this course was very well designed and constructed.

I think I have the answer. Looking at a current scorecard, the hole is Blue 392, White 342, Gold 336, Red 263. From that Blue tee, it is about 310 to the trap in question per Google maps. There is another tee just in front of that one measuring 280 to the trap, which does not correspond to any of the tees on the card. From the tee where the White and Gold markers are typically set (the tee adjacent to the 5th green) it is about 230 to the trap. Now I look at an old scorecard. Blue tee 342, White tee 328, Red tee 263. Blue and White are using the main tee next to the 5th green, 230 from the trap, and the two back tees do not yet exist. At that time, the trap was well positioned to catch hooked shots from better golfers.

I have played this course about a dozen times over the years. I think you are being far too generous in assessing the skills of the course designer. If not for a very interesting piece of land, this course would get very little play. We could also talk about the absurd positioning of the stream on 4, the steeply uphill fairway on 8, the awkward landing zones on 9, 11, and 15, and a bunch of other stuff that makes me feel the good holes are just by accident. Back to number 6, though. The green is small, has some interesting contours and bunker protection, so I agree the fairway bunker and the tree are totally superfluous.

Amazing how many 70's rock heroes are still touring. Our daughter presented my wife and I with tickets to the Blondie / Elvis Costello concert last Tuesday in Boston. Debbie Harry still sounding great at 74!

August 2019 issue 102 pages, of which about 21 are advertising. Both numbers definitely down from prior years. I subscribe to Golf Digest and Golf, each for about $12 per year or $1 per issue (vs. that $7 single issue price). Would guess that anybody who still enjoys reading these, subscribes and doesn't buy individual issues.

It takes two years for a pro to stop competing and fall all the way off the world golf ranking, might make sense for that to be the minimum time to regain amateur status also.

If we are including sympathy votes, then Payne Stewart gets my #3 all time vote.

Heartily agree on Mid Ocean, paid $150 about 20 years ago and $200 ten years ago, and would love to play there again. Spectacular holes (Cape), quirky holes, and gorgeous views everywhere. My highest was the Old Course, $240 including caddy 13 years ago. Seems like with the golf course glut, rarely have to pay over $150 now for a great course.