There was a few reasons I avoided it:
1. Price
2. Penal design (nothing like heaps of holes where good shots were feeding into hazards)
3. Lack of rounds under 5hrs
It was always in decent nick when I was there, but I never enjoyed being out on course there, probably due to reasons 2 and 3 above.
Reason 1 was never a factor for me as I didn't have to pay, but even a decade ago they were stinging social golfers $140 a round, sometimes.
Reason 2, however, is one I remember a lot from playing there. I am not sure I have ever played another course than punishes well-hit fairway shots as much as Northlakes. Some of the fairways, unless you hit a big ropey draw high up onto the high side, your ball would trickle into a hazard or at best the rough if there was lucky enough to be some to stop the ball. On a few holes I remember the better outcomes were from poor shots that landed high up in the rough which would bounce down and into the middle of the fairway.
Comparing this to say Brookwater, which is equally difficult, tree-lined and a chopper's nightmare, however always rewards a well-struck shot down the guts as the fairways tend to funnel inwards.
There is a difference between a course being tough and a course being penal where it shouldn't. I enjoy tougher courses despite almost always putting up a big score; poor outcomes from poor shots is to be expected. I don't much enjoy poor outcomes from good shots, however.
I knew some joker would say that despite entirely understanding the point I was making.
If the only way to hit the fairway is to not hit the fairway then I put to you that it is poor hole design, or unenjoyable hole layout at best.
The topic of discussion was why the course is not enjoyable. That is a valid reason.
When it’s dry and hard, seemingly good shots at Riverlakes will end up in hazards too but old blokes can bunt it around and keep it on the short stuff.
The inability or unwillingness to execute the shots required v course being too hard are different arguments.
Choppers gonna chop. It’s not the course’s fault.
Doesn't stop Northlakes being poo
spasticrap
Sim 2 Max / PRGR
3W 7W 4H - Sim 2 Max
Miura 57 CBs - ADDI
Odessey #7
The same goes for almost every course in SEQ when things dry out. I am not talking about running long or over-running your shot shape with the bounce and roll of hard fairways. There are holes on Northlakes where hitting the extreme upper left side of the fairway can result in the ball rolling into the hazard on the lower right. The hole almost takes itself out of play, unless you aim up near the cart path in the rough, dodging the trees, and have it run down into the fairway.
If some loose argument is being made that this is somehow good design and enjoyable to play, I would love to hear it. In my opinion it is neither, and is penal for the wrong reasons and in a very different way to any of the other more difficult (and more enjoyable) courses in the region.
I can chop it on any course without fuss.
Northlakes is garbage.
/thread
There were not 'many areas' for other options in the hole I am thinking of at Northlakes. The way it played was not by design, it fought against its own design. Having to land almost in the bush or on a cart path for an effective tee shot does not a good hole make.
Imagine if we were discussing a car being discontinued after losing money:
"In my opinion after driving this car many times this car handled horribly and was always unenjoyable to drive compared to other options in its class. Every time I took a particular corner in the rain it would spin out, which I disliked."
"Yeah, but you are a shit driver."
Those two things are not mutually exclusive. The car and the driver can both be terrible.
I played with far better golfers. Their opinion (and resulting shots) were much the same.
Regardless, and going back to the car analogy, that is a bit like saying a better driver would be able to take the corner with more success. Well yes, but how does that make the car more enjoyable or any better in any way.
Northlakes is the Mitsubishi Magna of golf courses.
So you are saying you have to be a pro or better (british open shots were not holding) to enjoy what is a resort course!!!!
I think the point is that even the pro's (who get on for free) would whinge about their good shots ending up in a hazard through a poorly designed course, as opposed to single figure markes who pay in excess of $100 to enjoy what is considered a top Brisbane course.
You've started your last two posts by telling me what I'm saying and getting it completely wrong. Let's try and simplify it, 2 questions requiring yes or no answers. 520m par 5, 60m wide, flat fairway, no bunkers. You hit driver dead straight 290m. Is that a good shot? Next hole, 150m par 3. You hit driver dead straight 290m. Is that a good shot?
Yeah ok. Great point.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)