Tie Course Reviews: The Tree Farm - Henry Shimp

 Where The Tree Farm shakes out in my Rankings:

CEILING: 90.5

Out of 100, how good can it be? Think PV/Cypress as your 99’s and say Harbortown as an ~83

RATING: 87

What do I think it is at currently? Significantly, how close is this rating to its ceiling?

TREND OVER TIME: 7.5

Do I enjoy it most the first time or does it get better over time? The latter receives more points

In my ever-evolving personal course ratings, (currently I’ve played 56/100 in GOLF’s 2023-2024 US Top 100) Tree Farm currently is straddled between Cherry Hills, Bandon Trails, and Palmetto GC (3 directly above it) and Garden City, Valley Club of Montecito, and Somerset Hills (3 directly below it). I really like where this sits because while I LOVE all 7 of these courses, the land is probably the differentiating factor. Cherry, Trails, and Palmetto have the superior land to Garden City, Valley Club, and Somerset, and Tree Farm sits right in between those two sets of courses. We are absolutely splitting hairs here, but that is how I personally feel. While I get that this may feel like a hot take to some, I am of the opinion that new stuff can be as good as the classics, so long as you have played a course enough to have a fully baked opinion on it. Difference of opinion? Please reach out! Would love to hear any and all thoughts!

Introduction:

You’ve heard the Old Barnwell vs. Tree Farm breakdown on House Theory Thursday. You’ve read the comparison as the Boxing Day Special. But what I’ve yet to do is break down either of these 2 courses in the amount of detail that they deserve on an individual basis. So, here we are. The Tree Farm review:

Now, as we must disclose our personal trading activities to the SEC, we must get on the record any conflicts of interest regarding golf courses as well (because many people take this stuff that seriously and then some…). I am a member of The Tree Farm and have had involvement with the club since its inception. That said, I can be objective too, and no golf course comes without flaws and things to nitpick. So today I will provide plenty of that; however, this review will come completely in the absence of comparison to Old Barnwell. Been there. Done that. Hammer the links above if that is what you are after.

My 3 Core Takeaways Regarding The Tree Farm:

  1. The restraint used towards the building of greens, supplementation of hazards, and movement of dirt is the defining element of the course’s character.

  2. The Golf Course follows the 80/20 rule of challenge vs. playability beautifully.

  3. Every time you play the course, you learn something new and enjoy it more. Which is the best thing a golf course can present to a player, in my opinion.


Point 1:

The restraint used towards the building of greens, supplementation of hazards, and movement of dirt is the defining element of the course’s character.

I’ve now had the chance to play Tree Farm probably in the 8-10x range. I have seen it at its near peak, and I have seen it on not its best days. Cold days, hot days, wet days, dry days. So, I feel I have the breadth of experiences at the place to really break it down based on its full offering and not just on a single experience that may push me too far to one end of the spectrum.

Any time the word restraint comes into play when talking about a golf course, there is one overarching theme that almost certainly will be at play, and that is a high-quality piece of land. While you could show restraint on a benign site, I would advise against it. The Tree Farm is built on a large piece of property with a lot more land movement than you may expect. It’s not Augusta scale, but it’s barking up that tree. Speaking of trees, the decision to leave some trees in mostly for texture of the property but a few for strategy as well, while also taking many of them out was a decision that makes a large property seem relatively smaller because you can see so many holes from virtually every spot on the course. While this also allows you to see the size and scale of the land at the same time, I always love the feel of connectivity that courses have when trees are kept sparingly.

The true highlight of the golf course, in my opinion, is the selection of the green sites and the experience that has created for on approach play, play around the greens, and the usage of the flat stick (which if you are smart is often one and the same with play around the greens…). So many of the greens were placed in areas of the property where there is already supreme land movement that creates for intriguing approach play as well as short game/putting so that not a ton needed to be done when the actual building, or lack thereof, of the greens was done. Rather than a “build the hole then build the green” method, the model at the Tree Farm was “find the green then build the hole.” Everything at Tree Farm was built at grade with no greens, tees, or fairways having been built up artificially which is another element of design that allows the wonderful property to be the star of the show.

Harping back to that word restraint, not only are the greens a masterclass in letting the land dictate play, but the surroundings show more of the same. There are 8 total green sites with no bunkers at all and I would make the argument that this makes some of them more challenging than they otherwise would be. Especially with short shots greenside, it is much easier to get height and spin on the ball out of the sand than off short grass. This is a classic misunderstanding of modern architecture that a lack of bunkers makes golf easier. In my opinion, it makes it more playable for a bad player, but more perplexing for good ones, which is precisely what architects should be trying to accomplish. I have heard a few people say they believe a few of the holes without bunkers are a little plain and benign should you miss the green, which I can understand, but I will visit this more in my next point on the 80/20 rule of golf.

The usage of non-greenside hazards follows a similar narrative. It’s by and large the things that were already there, and the undulation of the property that are the “hazards.” The 9th hole is my favorite example of this. A wide open, short-mid length par 5 with no bunkers (for the time being). While if the goal off the tee is just short grass you essentially can’t miss; however, this doesn’t tell the whole story. If you leave your ball right and away from the left woods, you are left with a hanging lie trying to hit a right-handed cut into a thin green with a left or right miss leaving a Pinehurst No. 2 type of pitch. In other words, a low odds chance at hitting the green in 2. If you want the attractive approach from the left side of the fairway up the gut of the green and off a flat lie, you’ll have to bring the left woods into play. Simple stuff that only becomes clear after a few plays of the course which is one example of a larger theme of the course, which is that with each playing, you begin to understand more of its subtleties and what makes it a really cool place to play.

Point 2:

The Golf Course follows the 80/20 rule of challenge vs. playability beautifully.

The 80/20 rule. This may be the key to life. Dietarily speaking, effort in work or fitness, so many examples. 80% keep things simple and between the lines. 20% of the time, get after it. Have fun. Work hard. Eat what you want. Completely wring out the towel in the gym.

The way the 80/20 rule applies to golf courses is twofold. One, it can be applied to a macro level view of a course’s day to day difficulty. And two, it can be applied to a specific shot, hole, or green.

At the macro level, and particularly for a destination or buddies trip oriented golf course like Tree Farm, I think it makes a ton of sense for a course to be stern but fun and fair 80% of the time. Hard enough where when you hit bad shots you are slapped on the wrist, but easy enough where you aren’t getting beat up and the majority of players will have a handful of birdies, hit some shots they can be proud of, and most importantly be able to enjoy themselves. That is the 80%. The 20% is where the greenskeeper gets to put on his horn-rimmed glasses and steal the fun from the golfers. Hard pins, super firm fast greens, tight firm fairways, golf on the edge. You’ll hit many shots that end up much worse than expected and leave you in places that just aren’t good at all. This isn’t a style of play people are going to want to see all too often, but for competitions and select days where the limits of the course are meant to be tested, I love seeing a course that can push it to this sort of level and The Tree Farm can dial it up in short order. The greens were built in a white shoe manner where you can really tell the quality and health of the grass that makes the putting experience highly enjoyable yet robust. Because the greens have that level of health to them, it isn’t hard to dial up the speed and firmness when desired.

Looking at this on a smaller scale, I believe the 80/20 rule holds true regarding shot and hole types, lengths, and general challenge levels as well. Let’s use the par 3’s as an example of this. Hole 1 (yes, par 3 opener), Mid iron, plenty large enough green, a stone cold “can you take it from the range to the course?” shot. Hole 4, from all the way back it’s 280. But regardless, it’s long and it’s hard. This is a 20% shot. Courses should have some shots that make it hard. Hole 15, the redan. A classic and fun template that is an anomaly on a course where, as discussed, most everything was built based on the dictation of the land. This was a great piece of the land for a redan, but any redan requires some manufacturing. Finally hole 17, a shorty. 8 iron max, can be a wedge, but even this hole in itself has some 80/20 to it. There are certain hole locations where it’s short and highly scorable, and some where it doesn’t matter how short it may be, it can be vicious. The Tree Farm is the antithesis of a course where you just need a shot or two on repeat. What’s required of you is constantly in flux, which is a crucial element of interesting golf.

Back to the original point, for a place where there are plenty of good players around, yet many trips aren’t meant to end in a show and tell of how many doubles were made on and around the greens, for The Tree Farm to practice restraint in the conditioning and difficulty 80% of the time makes sense. But, to always have the joker in the back pocket and be able to take golfers’ souls in a few days’ notice is also a great thing to have.

Point 3:

Every time you play the course, you learn something new and enjoy it more. Which is the best thing a golf course can present to a player, in my opinion.

The Tree Farm is a new golf course that is still evolving. Whether it’s minor features in the fairways, detailing of the greens, or an alternate tee box or green, it won’t be “done done” for a little while longer, but one of my favorite elements of the place is how it evolves on you with each successive playing. Now to some extent, the same can be said for any course you play more than a few times; however, as someone who has played a good number of really good courses more than a few times, I can attest to the fact that The Tree Farm grows on you significantly more than many comparable level courses do. What I consider this to come from is the subtlety of the greens and the necessity to see more than a few hole locations and angles/distances of attack to really begin to uncover how much range the course has. When a course has a lot of bold features, it jumps out at you more and you see what it’s made of faster. This can be good if you continue to go back and enjoy it more as you learn more about it. But I believe this can also be not such a good thing if you feel as if you understand a place pretty well the first time through and then it doesn’t necessarily grow on you with return trips. In other words, if the Trend Over Time of a course isn’t good, it’s a knock on it relative to others.

It’s always the subtle courses built on interesting pieces of land that grow on you over time. The consummate example here is The Old Course. You could play it 1000x and I think it would continue to develop in your opinion of it. There aren’t a ton of bold features that were built out there, rather it is the amazing depth of the land the course is on that takes so much time to understand and uncover. You’ll learn something small but new and important every time through. San Francisco Golf Club is another one of my favorites that has this. Simple AW Tillinghast features on great land with endlessly interesting greens that you need to see in different playing conditions and hole locations to continue to gain the necessary understanding and appreciation of the course.

Harkening back to the point made about certain feedback on some greens and surrounds being “too plain,” this is where the courses nature of growing on you over time really comes out. While I had the same feeling towards a couple holes at The Tree Farm after just a look or two, (holes 2 and 6 being prime examples), what I’ve realized is after seeing more of those greens’ hole locations I now see those as perhaps some of the course’s best. With maybe not the green’s most interesting hole location and benign playing conditions (middling part of the 80%) certain greens at The Tree Farm, or any course, may not capture your attention quite right, but upon further examination you realize it’s the simple sophistication of the restraint shown that makes a green great. To not feel the need to “go big” on every hole, green, or feature is what makes a golf course classy, and it’s what makes for a course that will really reveal its secrets and depth over time.

Conclusion:

In today’s world of architecture, restraint can be a tough route to take. While the modern incumbents of Coore and Crenshaw, Hanse, and Doak have largely made their names in the minimalist school of architecture, we are also beginning to see more stuff that leans on the heavier side of human intervention. One is not right nor wrong. Both can be wonderful when applied to the right land in the right way, but when you step back from the matter and consider some of what I have covered regarding the way that big, bold features capture ones attention faster and may create for more positive albeit hasty reactions towards a golf course, it is commendable for a new tandem such as Blair and Goalby to go simple.

Going back to the title of the review, “Creative in Concept, Restrained in Design,” to see a new course have high level details such as a par 3 opener with a drivable par 4 finisher, all surrounded by the clubhouse and lunch area shows a clear lean to the creative side of the club. That being said, to couple those sorts of unique features with a golf course that in its design is less provocative but will still make an impression on people shows a desire to play the long game in the eyes of the critics. While one wild and exciting feature after another may gain the approval of someone at first look, I believe the higher level implements are what win out in perpetuity. The long-term approach, when done right, is always the right way to go, but hard to commit to in the short term. That being said, I believe the story of The Tree Farm in 2034 will be: they found great land, they didn’t overdo things with that land, they took the long term approach, and man does this course continue to age beautifully.

There’s nothing worse than to see a course debut highly in rankings only to slowly fall over time (once again Trend Over Time). Conversely, the opposite also holds true. I believe The Tree Farm will fall on the right side of that conversation.

Cheers,

HS

Previous
Previous

The Grounds: Lesson 6 - J.H. Taylor - Walker Simas

Next
Next

Sink Architecture - Walker Simas