|
Shadow's Run - Par 3 (2003)
by Steve & Tim Bausch
| Links Corner Course Database ID Number - 1204 |
Release Date |
CRZ Filesize |
Par |
Course Length |
| 2003-01-13 |
56,556,429 bytes |
54 |
3358 yards |
| Type |
Style |
CRZ Filename |
|
FICTIONAL Par 3 Course |
WOODLAND |
Shadow's Run.crz |
| Course ID |
Course Key |
| 1e07938125aa11d7a8560010b5069d1b |
e87b971c3e500c6d68a54ff9b54caf35 |
|
LINKS CORNER REVIEW |
Reviewed by Mike Nifong
January 2003
Course type: Shadow's Run is a fictional par-3 course located in a mountain woodland setting. Curiously, although reportedly designed as a companion course to Eagle Mountain (a course which uses the Whistler pano), it uses the Banff pano.
Historical perspective: Shadow's Run is the sixth APCD course released by the Bausch Brothers, and the fifth with which I am personally acquainted. Each of the previous courses was better than its predecessor, so a very high standard had been reached by the time their last course, Chesapeake Valley, was released, a fact that was reflected in its selection as a Links Corner Recommended Course. [I was the LC Official Reviewer for Ocean Pines and Quail Ridge Falls, the third and fourth chapters, respectively, of the Brothers' oeuvre; those two, along with Chesapeake Valley and this course, are part of my permanent collection.] While the present course cannot be said to surpass Chesapeake Valley, it is nonetheless a worthy successor that maintains that standard.
Insofar as I am aware, Shadow's Run is the first 'commissioned' work by the Bausch Brothers, having been requested by Don Bush, Tour Director for the Eagle Mountain Golf Association (EMGA) Tour. It was actually Don who gave it its name, in memoriam for his dog Shadow, who recently succumbed to lymphoma.
What is included: With one notable exception, Shadow's Run provides a very complete package. There are read-me files from both the Bausch Brothers and Don Bush (the latter detailing the sad final chapter in the life of the course's namesake and accompanied by a couple of pictures). The expected cameo and splash screen (two of them, actually) are here. In keeping with the nature of the venue, there is a tournament option with nicely scaled crowd planting and tournament objects (which cannot be switched off). There are also two recorded rounds (one from each Brother).
The unfortunate omission is the absence of hole previews. This is consistent with Steve's and Tim's past philosophy, and certainly the absence of hole previews is less of a deficit on a par-3 course, where the pins are normally visible. On the other hand, a well-designed hole preview does not generally restrict itself to merely a view of the layout, and information on such matters as green slopes would be very useful here, so I would count it as an opportunity lost.
How it looks: Although it is listed as a Links 2003 course - the first such effort from Steve and Tim - Shadow's Run was actually begun with the 2001 APCD, so it is something of a hybrid, of the sort that I have sometimes referred to as a '2001 course with shadows.' For the most part, the APCD 1.5 advances have not been utilized. There is no seam blending, the designers having opted for extrusions instead, the consequences of which are discussed below. And while some high-resolution textures have been used, they are often paired with what appear to be the more 'blurry' 2001 textures in some places to odd effect. The tee areas, for example, use 2003 textures, but the surrounding tee boxes, extruded upward in two steps, and ostensibly marking areas of higher grass, look artificially smooth in contrast. The relatively intimate nature of a par-3 venue also makes the lack of shadows from the crowds apparent, making me prefer to play without them despite the fact that they are effectively planted.
That having been said, however, Shadow's Run is an undeniably lovely course. The front nine in particular, where water is visible on eight holes (all but #7, though it cannot really be said to be in play on #5, #6, or #8 either), is full of picture-postcard material. The water edge treatments are uniformly excellent, most often combining medium-sized rocks and an assortment of grasses. The effect is clearly one of man-made impoundments rather than natural pools, but they fit the terrain extremely well and look quite convincing. A multitude of attractive and well-proportioned bridges serve to integrate the individual holes into a believable layout.
The bunkers are consistently finished, if nothing spectacular. Their uniform thin lips look fine, although I would have preferred texture blending. They also often allow the ball to roll through the bunkers, especially around the greens on those occasions when the tee shots are taken with fairway woods. I disapprove of the practice of running the mow lines right to the edge of the sand because I think it detracts from realism; although I feel confident that the choice here was made because of the desire to have the roll characteristics of the fairway texture around the bunkers to capture wayward shots, I think the preferable choice would be to assign the desired properties to a less manicured texture.
Planting is uniformly good, and the choices seem appropriate for the locale. There are a few instances where some repetition is noticeable on close inspection, but rarely, if ever, will that be apparent during play.
The one design choice that I really question is the appearance of the rock wall to the right of the tee area on #12: not only does the texture appear a little too 'stretched,' but the boundaries with the surrounding textures are much too sharp as well.
How it plays: As a general rule, I think of par-3 courses as essentially par/birdie venues that provide more of a challenge to the designer's creativity - it is pretty difficult to maintain a high level of interest in more than nine consecutive holes that, of necessity, have more than usual in common - than to the player's game. Shadow's Run threatens to overturn that preconception.
Although it is located in a mountain setting, Shadow's Run relies less on elevation change than you might expect. Only four holes feature a tee-to-green elevation change that exceeds 20 feet, and only the 58-foot drop on #2 and the 47-foot drop on #10 exceed a 27-foot differential. Moreover, while there is a significant range in hole lengths if you consider the extremes, ten of the eighteen holes fall into the relatively narrow 167-200 yard range, eleven of the eighteen fall into the 195-245 yard range, and only three are shorter than 167 yards (the 121-yard #3, the 117-yard #7, and the 98-yard #14). Playing from the back tees, fully half of my tee shots were with a 4I or 5I; from the front tees, seven of my tee shots were with an 8I or 9I; from either the front or the back, I used a total of eight clubs other than my putter. This is not a course, then, that will have you using every club in your bag. Yet it is a testament to the ingenuity of the layout that I never felt like I was playing the same hole twice.
As mentioned above, some of the design decisions affect play. I am pretty sure that such effect was intentional in the decision to extend the fairway texture, mow lines and all, into the bunkers. On a course where the most common situation is an elevated green with a steep slope down to one or more bunkers in front, the consequence is that virtually every shot that comes up short will find sand (or water in the cases where it fronts the greens). Given the scarcity of greens whose contours are truly amenable to chip shots, this puts a premium on getting the right distance off the tee, a prospect that is further complicated by the fact that the hole lengths often seem to fall between clubs. [In my experience, all other things being equal, you will usually be better off hitting too long than you will hitting too short.] I am less confident that the fact that it is possible to run the ball through the green-front bunkers on some of the longer holes was intentional, but it does tend to increase your options, which is never a bad thing.
On the other hand, I doubt that the effects caused by the extrusions were intended. I got many more bad bounces off them than is the norm on courses on which they are employed. While the bad bounces were not as prominent with the green-fringe extrusions, which usually just diverted the path of the ball slightly and slowed it down, I sometimes got a hop similar to what you might see when the ball strikes the back lip of the hole on a much-too-hard putt. Such hops were, unfortunately, the norm when encountering the extrusion between the fringe and whatever lay beyond (fairway or rough).
Ultimately, it seems, the key to the level of challenge on a par-3 course is defined by its greens. In that regard, Shadow's Run seems to have gotten things just right. Virtually all of the greens feature slopes that are appreciable but not unreasonable - the kind of slope that lets you get a long putt reasonably close to the hole but that can do you in on a three-footer if you get a little bit too nonchalant. Only on #18, where the green steps down in three tiers from left to right, with nearly 60 inches of differential between the middle and right tiers, does the design approach over-the-top, and we have all seen much worse examples than that.
For the most part, the holes seemed to play pretty close to their handicaps. The exceptions include #2 and #16, which play much tougher than their respective handicaps of 12 and 15. The closest thing to an easy stretch on the course would probably be #6/#7/#8. But the sequence on this course that will most likely fix itself in your memory is the final trilogy of holes, which constitutes one of the most challenging finishes that can be experienced in this game. The only real characteristic that those three holes share is that they are all between clubs (6I/7I on #16, 5W/6W on #17, and 4I/5I on #18). On #16 you do not want to be short, so opt for the longer club. On #17, you do not want to be right or left because the saddle-shaped green will make it hard to get a chip close to the pin from either side. On #18, in addition to the previously mentioned tiered green, you have to deal with the fact that any pin placement towards the left will be concealed from view by a hill, and any attempt to go straight at any concealed placement risks trouble from the trees on that side. It is these three holes that bear primary responsibility for the fact that the back nine plays a little tougher than the front. Good luck!
The AI foursome (skill level 79.0) posted the following results: under b/m/m/m conditions, they were a combined -1 (+4 to -5), landing 50% of the greens and averaging 24.75 putts per round; under w/f/f/d conditions, they were a combined +22 (+3 to +8), landing only 37% of the greens and averaging 25.75 putts per round.
Difficulty
The bottom line: An attractive and challenging course that seems especially well designed for tournament play: the three closing holes, in particular, are capable of effecting some significant swings in scoring totals.
[N.B. This score is intended for the purpose of facilitating comparison of this course with other Links 2003 courses reviewed by this reviewer. It is specifically not intended for comparison to reviews of Links 2001 courses by this reviewer, for which different scoring criteria were employed, or for similar review scores by other Links Corner reviewers, which may or may not accurately reflect the opinions of this reviewer.]
Course statistics: Par 54; 3 sets of tees (3358/2963/2621 yards); holes are handicapped. |
|
CLIPNOTES by Ben Bateson (ousgg) |
Description
Fictional, short course |
Location
TBA |
Conditions
TBA |
Concept 4/10
While Shadow's Run avoids many of the typical pitfalls of Par 3 courses -
namely the lack of variety and the predilection towards gimmicky golf -
and has good transition between holes, it does fall into several pitfalls.
Most of these are petty and visual, but it should be remembered that Par
3s have always been hard to make, and while the Bausch brothers have
done a decent job, it's unlikely to be a course that stays with you. |
Appearance 4/10
A big and frankly spoiling flaw is the obviousness of the extrusion marks. They are everywhere: around greens, fairways and tee
boxes, and really detract from what is potentially a good-looking course. Also on the fault list are some rather obvious clones, and a
lack of good textures. It's pretty plain, all told. |
Playability 3/10
Let's be honest…how playable can a Par 3 course be? Even with the good variation in hole lengths here, this is pretty standard fare.
You avoid the bunkers, you hit the centre of the greens, and you score par. There's little more to it, to be totally truthful. |
Challenge 8/10
As above, it's not too hard, not too easy. Generally well judged and at the very least a good workout for the variety of clubs that you're
carrying. Certainly the bunkers don't make excessive demands, but elsewhere, there's some slick elevation changes and inspired use
of planting as a hazard. Not at all bad. |
Technical 5/10
It's the technical flaws that keep this from being a really good course. It's nearly entirely the visual problems, as the layout of the
course is far in advance of many fictional courses out there. But there's that nagging feeling that if you're going to design a Par 3
course, it has to be really, really special. This is good, but special? No. |
| Overall |
A decent short course, let down by a few APCD problems. Fun for a one-off, but
you'll find it lacking on subsequent visits. |
24/50 |
Please remember that Clipnote reviews are the opinion of one person and do not constitute an 'Official' Links Corner review of the course. |
This course is available as a FREE download.
|
|
Download course
|
Please support Links Corner
|
|
|
