swetsb

The conditioning at Heron Ridge has been getting worse over the years, but it has become unacceptable, especially for a place that wants to charge Golden Horseshoe and Royal New Kent prices. Greens and fringes are different mixes of grasses, leading to consistently uneven lies and bare spots. Fairways play like hardpan. It's too bad, because the layout here is pretty good, requiring the player to hit a variety of shots. I would've thought the death of Signature would've put Heron Ridge on notice that they need to at least keep the same quality they used to have, but it appears they're determined to slowly deteriorate. Bide a Wee and Sleepy Hole are at the same conditioning level but cost a lot less, so that's where I'll be playing from now on.

The Gauntlet is a short course with many holes playing as true target golf. This isn't a bad thing, but it would be nice if more risk/reward options could have been integrated into the design. The green contours are very fun, but they aren't fast enough to truly take advantage of them. It was surprising that a course with such interesting greens did not have good greenside bunkers.
The major problem with the Gauntlet is that the conditioning is just bad. All of the fairway bunkers should have been marked as ground under repair. They claim the fairways are zoysia, but it looks like they were never maintained, and now St. Augustine grass has covered most of the surfaces. The course needs a massive tree pruning and thinning program to allow for more light and circulation, and thus better conditioning.
The other problem with the course is pace of play. Target golf courses just can't space out groups, so a 4.5 hour round is going to be the average, and I can imagine it getting a lot worse.
A dedicated management company that knew what they were doing could do really well with this course. I probably wouldn't play it again, but given the lack of good golf courses in the area, it may one of the better options in a bad situation.

Riverfront has really grown on me over the years. I used to avoid it because it's the most expensive daily fee course south of Williamsburg and there were too many other options. Now, though, as Signature and Cahoon have gone out of business, Virginia Beach National has filled in its waste areas, and Nansemond River has slowly started to sell its soul, I've started playing here more. And the more I do, the more I love the layout. I'm not sure I can name another course in Hampton Roads that has a green sloping from front to back, and Riverfront has a number of them. While I love the Golden Age architecture of Cavalier Country Club, the green complexes at Riverfront are simply amazing. They take a layout that is good and make it great.
That being said, the pace here is always brutally slow. Where almost every other course in the area might be a little more than 4 hours when they're busy, I'm forced to plan for a five hour round here. I've walked off after nine on multiple occasions because I just can't stand to wait that long.
I hope that their experience during the quarantine will convince them that walking should continue to be allowed, as it's the sheer number of people who are always there that slow up the pace of play, not the distance between some of the holes. I would also love it if they'd water the course a little bit less. The green complexes are built to allow players to run the ball up, but the areas in front of the greens are often wet and spongy, preventing that kind of play. Setting this course up to play fast would make it a lot more interesting and strategic.
Bonus points for having such a good practice area, with a huge grass range, separate chipping green, and a putting green that mimics the types of putts you'll see during your round.

I'm a sucker for old school parkland layouts like Sleepy Hole. The course is never in great shape, but something about it has just always appealed to me. It probably helps that it's so cheap, the pace is play is usually really good, and the 18th hole is one of the best holes in Hampton Roads (even if losing the huge tree on the left side has taken some of the fun out of it). From the tips, especially the back nine, the course is a brute. But it also is extremely straight forward and fair. If Sleepy Hole could be as well maintained as somewhere like Riverfront, it would be a gem. Restoring parts of the old Obici House was a good start. I wish they could have another capital campaign to build an outdoor area to take better advantage of the river views post round, and then throw some dollars at fixing their bunkers. Still, it's a good throw back design that provides a very good test at extremely reasonable prices.

I had little to no expectations for this course when I got there. I figured it was going to be just another short course marred by too many houses encroaching too closely on the fairways. I was so wrong. Cavalier contains tons of Golden Age template holes, which makes sense after finding out that the architect also worked on designing Yale Golf Club. The par 3's here are the best of any between the Gold Course and the Nicklaus Bay Creek course, and might even surpass those. Especially fun are the biarritz 5th and the redan 18th, although I wish the club would rework the contours a little on 18 to add more front to back slope. The restored bunkers also need a shout out, as they look and play phenomenally well. In true classic style, they tend to be very deep, especially next to the many raised up greens.
While the course is short and the fairways are pretty wide, you still need to work your ball to go low. It would be helpful if there were a driving range to warm up at to better allow you to get comfortable before teeing off, but there's no room on the property.
The course is easily walkable, although it can be surprisingly slow for a country club. I wish the club would play the greens faster to better protect what is a very short course. Still, definitely take advantage of playing here if you have the opportunity. There are too few courses left that have preserved and maintained this style of architecture.

I understand the golf business is hard, especially after the Great Recession. But man, selling off the driving range here to build terrible houses? Just sell the course and be done with it. Now, what had been the premiere layout in South Hampton Roads is just a really long dog track. I drove out to play a couple of weeks ago and found temporary greens all over the place and no evidence that the course was even trying to maintain itself. This had been my favorite track between Williamsburg and the Eastern Shore for a long time. It makes me sad that I probably will never bother going back there again.

As an east coaster, I wanted to play somewhere around Portland that let me know I was in the Pacific Northwest and not at a generic resort. Stonecreek did just that, although the back 9 was much better than the front.
Upon arrival, you'll notice a ton of locals and some very bitter employees. Ignore the employees and warm up on the spacious range or one of the two practice greens. Both were in good condition, even though the course was pretty wet.
Once on the course, I was impressed with how lush and well-drained everything was given the amount of rain we'd gotten. The bunkers especially were in great shape. The greens were fine, although it seems no one there wants to fix a ball mark.
The front nine opens up right in front of you, with no tricks or gimmicks. There are a couple of tee shots where being able to work the ball will help, but for the most part, what you see is what you get. The greens are mostly elevated or guarded by bunkers in the front, so along with a course that I imagine is usually at least a little wet, there aren't many opportunities to run the ball up to the hole.
Once you reach the 11th hole, the fairways narrow considerably and ball placement becomes much more critical. You also get more elevation change, which can leave some difficult shots where you have a downhill lie to an uphill green. The par 3's on this course are pretty good, and I especially loved 14, a wedge over a natural area to a super narrow green. Hit it into the hill behind the green and let it feed your ball back to the hole. Modern architects seem to have forgotten how fun short par 3's are; the 14th is a prime example of the type of design features courses should try to incorporate.
I wish the front 9 was more like the back, but I still had an enjoyable round. I would recommend this course if you're in the area.

The renovation of New Kent has completely changed my mind on this course. I used to hate playing here as the bunkers were always washed out and the greens were terrible. After playing it with new grass and bunkers, it's like night and day. The greens are the same as the new ones at Pinehurst 2 and 4, and they make all the difference in the world. The greens are receptive without leaving huge craters on approach shots, and putts roll as fast and as true as any course you'll ever that doesn't host major championships. If you hit into a bunker, you can now actually play out of them without either being on hardpan or in standing water.
The course could still use some improvement. GPS on the carts would really help speed up play, especially for people who have never played the course before, and the range gets really swampy, especially compared to the rest of the course. But these are trivial concerns compared to the overall experience. New Kent has finally been set up in a way that gives credit to Mike Stanz's world-class design. It is an absolute must play.

With apologies to the River Course and Royal New Kent, this is the best course in Tidewater. RTJ crafted a course that has stunning visuals while still looking like he barely moved any dirt. It feels like New England in the heart of Virginia.
The front nine serves as a good warm up, as it plays much shorter and narrower. A good wedge game will really allow you to score, if you an avoid all trees. Once you get to the back, especially from 14 in, the course opens up. Of course, it also gets really long and difficult, so your driver better be working. 16-18 are up there with courses like Pinehurst #2 and Bethpage Black (well, maybe 14-17 at the Black) for best finishing holes on the east coast. I can't say I notice a difference since they replaced the grass with a new breed a couple of years ago, but the bunker work they did was top notch and has really improved the conditioning.
Post round, make sure to make the short trip to Colonial Williamsburg for great food and beer (Hi, Precarious!). It's the perfect end to a day made perfect by getting to play the Gold Course.

I absolutely love this course. It's hard without being overly penal, it requires you to hit all manner of clubs and shots, and it's always in pretty good condition. It's just one of those courses that even when you play poorly, it's still really fun.
An interesting thing about Woodmore is that it's very much a first shot course. Many of the tee shots benefit from hitting less than driver, and being able to work the ball is greatly rewarded. If you can find the fairway, you generally can look forward to par or better, as most of the holes' defenses are the doglegs, elevation changes, and fairway bunkers. From your second shot and in, the course plays short and the greens aren't too difficult.
Maybe the best part about Woodmore is the finish of 16-18, especially in match play. You really can't lose your focus down the stretch. This is especially difficult when the grill between 18 green and 10 tee is going and people on the patio are watching!

Bidermann is a true championship course. By that, I mean it requires you to be smart with your ball placement, demands that your misses be in the right spots, and forces you to hit every club and shot in your bag.
The conditions were very good, although the growth of some fescue or native grasses would have been a great contrast to the fairways and ample rough.
After a quirky first hole, Bidermann is clearly laid out in front of you. There are few trees on the interior of course, so you can clearly see what you need to do from the tee. There are a number of doglegs and steep elevation changes between the tee and green, although the two are often at roughly the same elevation. The greens were playing pretty quickly the day I was there, although the member said they were frequently faster. The greens are the courses best defense, as they had a number of moderately steep slopes. Hitting your ball hole high or past meant you were lagging your first putt, not trying to make it.
All that said, Bidermann is not a fun course to play. It's challenging, and playing well is definitely rewarding, but it's not a course that I'd want to play every day. It's kind of like playing a US Open course for amateurs: hit the fairway, hit the green, two putt, and move on. There aren't really any risk/reward holes or unique shots that attract your attention. Instead, you're spending your round trying to grind out pars. Again, this can be really rewarding. It's just not all that fun over 18 holes.

Stonehouse, along with New Kent, have gone out of business.

Viniterra is the case study of everything that is great and awful about modern golf course architecture. On the positive side, the course is aesthetically beautiful. The elevation changes, hazards, and angles all come together perfectly to thrill the eye. The problem is that these also mean you can only play the course one way: driver off the tee that avoids a bunker or two in the landing area while also carrying a good distance to get over the gorge between the tee and fairway, then an elevated shot to a green that probably has a significant dip in front that prevents employing any sort of run-it-up strategy. Plus, with the course being so spread out, you not only can't walk, but you can't play fast. I played in a threesome of decent to good players who all played fast, and it still took us over four hours to play.
Even if this type of complaint doesn't bother you, I don't really understand who is playing this course and why. Brickshire, Kiskiack, and Colonial Heritage are both nearby, and both offer similar but better designs, as well as much better conditions. Viniterra has clearly fallen prey to the same problems that New Kent and Stonehouse did: they are either unwilling or unable to hire talented maintenance staff that can effectively deal with the steep slopes and massive elevation changes. Almost every bunker was washed out, while hills often had huge dead spots. Even the fairways were sparse, as somehow the Bermuda is struggling to fill in the gaps.
Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed my round here. And for $37 on GolfNow, it's a bargain. But I also wouldn't return unless someone really wanted to play here. Go once for something new, but I don't think you'll want to return.

I've never understood why people enjoy playing here. Every hole is driver/wedge. There's little in the way of trouble, even if you're in the rough. Conditions are always average, while prices are too high. Go to Stanley or Rockledge if you're looking for something close, Simsbury Farms or Timberlin if you're willing to drive a little farther.

I was staying in Manhattan Beach and looking for a course that didn't put me on the 405. It was almost an hour to drive out to Industry Hills, but I was mostly against traffic in both directions, so the drive wasn't too bad.
Couldn't believe that we mostly had the course to ourselves on a Friday morning. Even without waiting on many shots, though, it's still going to be a 4.5 hour round. There's a lot of distance between holes, and the governors on the carts really slow you down. Without exaggeration, I bet you could knock at least 10 minutes off your round with carts driving at just normal speeds.
I enjoyed the layout of the course a lot. There's a lot of elevation change, and you have to be both straight and precise with your distances off the tee to be in the correct position to hit the green. Second shots have to worked to come in from the right direction to utilize slopes while minimizing risk. A shot straight at the hole, especially on the front nine, is often the incorrect play. While the course is somewhat narrow off the tee (again, much more so on the front than the back), the fairways tend to be in valleys that funnel balls back into the short grass.Thicker rough that prevented this could definitely make the course a much tougher test. I do appreciate that they both kept the sizes of the green down, while doing an excellent job of using slopes and humps to create distinct pin placements. The architect did a pretty good job of accepting that the course was going to be shorter, and embracing the challenge instead of taking a normal, modern course and just shortening it.
That said, I have two complaints with the course. The bigger one is that I wish the architect had allowed more options for running the ball up to the green. For example, the first hole could be an amazing risk/reward hole, as it plays blind and steeply down hill. Firming the course and removing the trough in front of the green could allow bombers to attempt to drive the first green, with a huge potential for disaster. Instead, the trough forces a layup and then an elevated shot to a narrow green without much back to front slope to help stop the ball. This is one example of a way the course could've been way more fun.
My other complaint is with the conditioning. The greens were on the slow side, and that's fine, if not preferable. But the course was really overwatered, which seems wrong from both an environmental and playability perspective.
Overall, I enjoyed my round here. The views were great, the layout was fun, and the price was absolutely reasonable. But it was hard to not think about how much better it could've been with a couple of design and maintenance changes.

Maybe I was spoiled by playing other nice courses the two days prior to Lake Monticello, but I didn't care about this course at all. There was nothing visually or strategically interesting about the layout at all. The greens were all basically completely flat and unreceptive, while the fairway and tees look like the Bermuda that grows in your lawn after not being mowed for a week. The pro shop wouldn't let me hit balls because our tee time was in ten minutes, even though there was a back up on the tee. There's just no reason to play here.

I had never heard of this course, so I wasn't overly excited about playing it. Man, was I wrong. The layout was really good, and the conditions were top notch. The fairways were somehow cut short but spongy in a way that made the ball always seem like it was sitting up on a tee. To top it off, the restaurant food was phenomenal.
To earn five stars, the course would need just slight design changes. The greens could use more slope to increase their difficulty, and the bunkers could be more assertive. There were a couple of times where they installed bunkers almost like the church pews at Oakmont, which I really liked the idea of. But they were small with no depth or lips, so they instead looked like afterthoughts.
Still, these are very minor complaints. I would happily come back here and would encourage people to make the drive from up to an hour away to do the same.

I'll give Primland credit, they have successfully gone all out on every aspect of this resort. From the time you get out of your car, every staff member is exceedingly friendly and helpful. The views are extraordinary; make sure you hit at least one junk ball into what looks to be a thousand foot drop off of the 18th tee. The course itself could not be in better condition, especially the greens. The food in the restaurant is the best golf course food I've ever had, but of course you will pay for it.
Still, this course wasn't totally for me. While I love mountain golf, with its elevation changes and optical illusions, I like the old school style of smaller greens. These greens are just entirely too large. Putting GPS on the carts would be really helpful, as the size of the greens makes it impossible to be precise with your approach distances. When each third of the green can be 20 yards deep (or more!), you're more likely to hit it close because you were lucky, not because you were good.
I haven't played a course outside of Scottsdale that was in as pristine condition as Primland, and I could probably be talked into going back. But I wouldn't go out of my way to do so, as it's not a course that will reward you for playing well.

Poplar Grove has a fantastic layout, reminiscent of Royal New Kent with lots of elevation change and doglegs where you're not quite sure how far to hit it. Royal New Kent, however, offers yardage books (or GPS at other courses) so you know what to do. Poplar Grove leaves you guessing.
Another similarity between the courses is that you can't put an extreme layout in the middle of no where. Both courses suffer from a lack of qualified greenskeepers and maintenance staff that are essential to keeping a course like this playable, as you just can't find people in the sticks. The greens at Poplar Grove were shaggy and inconsistent, while the bunkers had multiple types of sand and tons of grass growing in them. None looked like they had ever been maintained by anyone other than the stray unlucky golfer who found one.
The lack of staff isn't just on the maintenance end. When I played early on a Sunday afternoon, the course had one person to run the pro shop, the "restaurant," and the carts. I didn't see any other person over the next five hours who had anything to do with running the course.
It's too bad that the course is apparently only able to stay open by hiring a single person, as there is so much potential here. As it is, I wouldn't recommend going out of your way to play here.