Still Not a Hater
Also: Great Lakes Loop goes full-time
I have a feature on Instagram (also BlueSky and Threads - greatlakesloops on both) called #MIGolfCourseAerialOfTheDay. I’ve covered a lot of courses over the past few years, and I usually leave a thought or opinion on the design. Most courses, regardless of overall quality, have a legitimate place and a target audience that belongs in this state - I truly believe that. Occasionally, though, when I see something that doesn’t look great, I will have some criticisms to share. I’m aware when I criticize a design that not everybody has seen or is able to aggregate my entire body of writing or opinions, so in some cases I’ve been labeled as hating certain things about courses, or hating certain architects.
Is that correct? On one hand, maybe. I did write two articles, after all, about courses that I hate. Maybe I’m the biggest hater. I hate the way your corridors are too tight. I hate the way your hazards are hidden. I hate the way that you are overhyped. I even hate the way that you say “Up North Feel”.*
I’ve also never written nice things about a course in exchange for money. I don’t plan on it, either. That’s the point of Great Lakes Loops. There isn’t enough honest coverage of golf in the state. Were that honesty to be mistaken for hostility, that would be a misreading of simple criticism.
So let me just definitively say, there isn’t a single architect out there whose work I refuse to play, or would discredit immediately without giving the place a chance. Michigan happens to have a small handful of designers who have built an abundance of the courses in the state, so the chances of their work ending up in my crosshairs is higher. When I criticize a course of theirs, it often gets more visibility than when I praise one of their courses.
So consider this a course correction. Here are three topics that I’m taking back the narrative on.
* Checking off my bucket list: “play with some bars of ‘euphoria’ and work them into a golf article.”
Arthur Hills
Good old Art Hills. It’s impossible to talk about golf in Michigan without addressing Art almost immediately. He might have the greatest abundance of high profile or well-known courses in the state. Across his entire portfolio, he got to work on some of the best pieces of land in the state, and it’s hard to challenge places like Bay Harbor, Shepherd’s Hollow, or Red Hawk in terms of memorable topography. I happen to have played a lot of Art’s course, so let me just say straight up, I don’t think Art Hills made bad courses. I have a lot of varying opinions on them, but his courses being bad is not one of them.
The two criticisms I’ve had of Hills are as follows. One, when you get down to playing his actual courses, they all “feel” roughly the same. Bay Harbor has one of the most memorable settings in the state, and as you stand on the Links nine, you undeniably have a sense of place that is totally unique. And yet if your brain could block out the view, or if you simply go play the Preserve nine, which doesn’t have the same water views, you might get the sense that you were playing Golden Fox, Fieldstone, or Stonebridge. The hole designs by Hills are almost always, in my estimation, somewhere between fine, decent, and good. They just have a certain feel, though, and you just know when you are playing one of his courses.
In addition to the lack of distinction between holes, Art had a tendency to force some of his routings, resulting in one or two holes that would stick out and not fit with the rest of the course. I have yet to find the course of his where every single hole hits, and where I wouldn’t change a thing. Again, it doesn’t make his courses bad (well, maybe Pine Trace), it just holds them back from reaching that elite level.
My second criticism of Hills isn’t really even his fault. Among course owners and operators, he somehow got an outsized reputation that has made it nearly impossible to find good value at an Art Hills design. Simply visit the website of any Hills course, and you will read about a “championship course” by a “world-renowned” and “premier” designer. Sorry to say, but you are being lied to.
Were we talking about a classic Ross, MacKenzie, or Tillinghast course, or a modern design by Doak, Hanse, or Coore and Crenshaw, I would at least understand the reputation. I don’t quite understand how Hills got a matching reputation, or why his courses are so expensive.
Because of this, I did want to point out the rare treat that is The Legacy at Ottawa Lake, sometimes known as The Legacy by Arthur Hills. Everything in the name and even the way he is revered on the website suggests this is another overhyped and overpriced Hills course. If it had an address in Metro Detroit, that might be the case. But being tucked into the southeast corner of the state, close to Toledo, the market is not there to price a round any higher than $60 on a summer weekend morning. It’s classic Art Hills architecture at a normal golf price.
I will also freely admit that I still have a soft spot for Shepherd’s Hollow (horrific 16th hole and all). So by all means, continue to play and enjoy golf at an Art Hills track. Tell me I’m wrong if you think his courses are elite. But don’t call me an Art Hills hater. I’m simply pointing out that for those of who have played golf around the state, I feel like we are being treated like suckers at many Art Hills courses, and I simply refuse to fall for it.
Jerry Matthews
As ubiquitous as the work of Arthur Hills is, I don’t think he can hold a candle to the sheer volume of work that Jerry Matthews has in Michigan. Whether a solo design by Jerry, or a collaboration with his father Bruce, or his nephew Bruce III, it’s hard to play a golf course in Michigan that he hasn’t been involved with. Due to the depth and breadth of his work in the state, you get a wide variety of experiences, and less of the sameness that you get with Art Hills.
Sure, there are some common critiques of Jerry Matthews that are legit, such as his reliance on containment mounding (the Matthews design philosophy required every green to have three mounds behind it, according to Tom Doak). And a fair number of his most notable courses (much like Art Hills) are part of housing communities. Housing community golf stinks, regardless of the design. Some of Jerry’s work also has that Art Hills mystique - revered and expensive.
But unlike Hills, Matthews has plenty of courses that fly under the radar. Northport Creek is a good example. The Links at Hunters Ridge, Timber Trace, and the Sundance course at A-Ga-Ming are others course that I’ve heard praised for their designs, while not being overhyped. Some fly even farther under the radar as small local courses, such as Crystal Lake GC, which the whole Matthews family worked on over time.
I haven’t necessarily ever been labeled a Jerry Matthews hater, but he is of the same era and predominance as Art Hills, so they can easily be lumped together. Jerry certainly has some clunkers on his resume, but I think there is too much variety there to pan his work across the board.
Trees
Now here I have, specifically, been told that I am a hater of trees. This claim is the most false. I have a pretty consistent way of considering trees on a golf course.
Are the trees natural to the site? If yes, we are all good! Just make sure the corridors are wide enough for play. At the risk of piling on, I talk about the difference between good corridors on a wooded site (Shepherd’s Hollow) and bad corridors (Moose Ridge) here.
Did the original site feature a lack of trees (i.e., farmland or meadow)? Then it should stay that way. You won’t find me hate any harder than on a course that started with no trees, and later planted hundreds of them between, around, and on every hole. And if the trees you planted were spruce trees, don’t even talk to me anymore. I’m out.
A lot of courses are somewhere on a spectrum between these two poles. So I say just stick to the basics. If there are trees, they should be native to the area, and the corridors should be wide enough. If it’s a judgment call on if a tree should stand where it is or be taken down, I would consider whether or not it is native, and how it impacts sightlines. Unless it’s an “Up North Feel” course, where the holes are meant to feel isolated, most courses are better off opening sightlines and views across the course. This is even more true when there is great land movement to the site. Excessive trees hide those features, and make every tree-lined course look the same.
And last but not least is my favorite un-scientific opinion to express. Many courses plant trees between parallel or close-together holes, thinking it helps with safety. I ask you, when is a group more likely to yell “fore”? When they can plainly see a ball heading toward a group on another hole? Or when the ball is hit over a tall stand of trees, and it’s not possible to tell if there are golfers in the line of fire on the other side? The excuse of “sorry, I didn’t see anyone over there” doesn’t work when you can see across the course.
Bonus - Ray Hearn
Nah, not today. The Ray Hearn discussion will come someday in the future, and it will be nuanced. That man is an enigma.
Betting on Great Lakes Loops
I started posting course aerials sometime in 2022, and started writing here on Substack in 2023, around the time that I also officially established Great Lakes Loops, LLC. This has always been a part-time, side hustle hobby for me, hence the sporadic posting at different times of the year.
As of now, however, the side hustle is no more. It’s time to bet on myself, and see where we can take this thing.
That is as much as I will say for now, as there are a number of different ways in which this can go. If you would like to support this endeavor, there will be ways to do so through upgraded subscriptions, partnership/sponsorship opportunities, or perhaps some GLL merchandise.
Let me know your thoughts on the things you would like to see from Great Lakes Loops in the future, or if you would like to discuss ways in which you might like to get involved. DMs are open on my socials, handle is greatlakesloops on Instagram, BlueSky, Threads. Or you can leave a message on Substack. Good old e-mail works, too: craig.levasseur@gmail.com
Congratulations, Craig. Let us know when the merch drops. Best of luck chasing the dream. If you ever have an idea for an article you think would be good, but you don't want to write it, consider giving me a crack at it.
Trees are definitely overrated, anyone who disagrees needs to play the front 9 at The Pines at Lake Isabella 10 times and get back to me.