Hardest Houston Courses Ranking

srm_520

Double Eagle Member
Diamond level trusted reviewer
Joined
Nov 12, 2008
Messages
1,559
Location
Cypress (Houston), TX
In response to this thread http://www.dgcoursereview.com/forums/showthread.php?t=6799, (post 37) I have compiled my list of what I believe to be the hardest to easiest courses in the greater Houston area. This means that I included all the way out to Conroe, but not the Clute or Lake Jackson courses. Granted this list is relative to what I believe is hard for me. That means primarily length, layout, and hazards served as the real considerations. This also means I considered "what would be my relative score on this course versus another.

This is not a "What's Best" course list. I'll make that once I finally play the last 7 or 8 in the area I haven't experienced yet. Courses I haven't played were intentionally not listed. A good example of hardest versus best is Terramont Park. I clearly think that it's the "best" 9 hole in the area, but IMO doesn't rank 1st in hardness. Likewise is the case with McDade Park one of the best courses in the great Houston area – but not necessarily very hard. Also – this list is based on playing the course from the regular tees, not alternates.

Also note that I separated any course over 10 holes onto a separate list because I don't believe one can't make great comparisons between 9 and 18 holes. Finally I have separated courses into Tiers since I feel certain courses are beyond the scope of others. This also means there may be a world of difference between (for example) Gwen Hurska – ranked #10 and Cedar Brook Elementary – ranked #11. They really aren't close in terms of hardness so it fell into a different tier. If you would like to search these courses – http://www.dgcoursereview.com/browse.php?cname=&country=1&city=&state=&zip_distance=50&zipcode=77002. And without further ado – the lists.

Not Yet Played/Not Ranked:

First Colony Aquatic Center
Shadow Creek
River Point Church
Imperial Park
Pecan Grove
Erickson Payne Home
McClendan Park


Hardest 9 Hole Courses:

Tier One Courses
1. Northside CC
2. Wortham Trail
3. Jim Mazola DGC
4. Terramont Park
5. Miramar Park

Tier Two Courses
6. Bridgepoint Church
7. Missouri City Community Park

Tier Three Courses
8. T.C. Jester Park
9. CrossPoint Comminuty Church
10. Gwen Hurska Park

Tier Four Courses
11. Cedar Brook Elementary School
12. Burke Crenshaw
13. Stonebridge Church
14. Mason Park


Best 12-18 Courses:

Tier One Courses
1. Spring Valley DGC
2. Oak Meadows Park
3. Tom Bass: Wilmont
4. Jack Brooks – Cedar Hills
5. The LINKS

Tier Two Courses
6. Tom Bass – Powell
7. River Grove DGC
8. McDade Park
9. Jack Brooks – Gulf Meadows

Tier Three Courses
10. Agnes Moffitt Park
11. MacGregor Park
12. Bear Branch Park
13. Nottingham Park
 
where would Tom Bass temp course fall? TX State DGChamp has been my only trip to H-town. and I was under par on my final round untill we got to the temp course holes.... OB,, OB, OB... OB... AHHH OB..
 
Tier Four Courses
11. Cedar Brook Elementary School
12. Burke Crenshaw
13. Stonebridge Church
14. Mason Park

Cedar Brook Elementary School - average hole distance 138'.
Burke Crenshaw - down to four baskets.
Stonebridge Church - still only five baskets...?
Mason Park - one tee remaining... most baskets unplayable.

Definitely bottom tier.
 
Wow - Oak Meadow is the 2nd hardest??!! I have only played that & Agnes Moffitt (which is a middle of the road or slightly lower course), but Oak Meadow was not hard/punishing at all. It is long to be sure, but the vast majority of holes do not have much punishment for bad shots and/or bad decisions. I do not know much about TX DG, but how does it rank with the most difficult in the state?
 
Mason shouldn't even be on the list. Feel free to replace it with Shadow Creek Ranch DGC; that's a pretty worthless course.
 
Wow - Oak Meadow is the 2nd hardest??!! I have only played that & Agnes Moffitt (which is a middle of the road or slightly lower course), but Oak Meadow was not hard/punishing at all. It is long to be sure, but the vast majority of holes do not have much punishment for bad shots and/or bad decisions. I do not know much about TX DG, but how does it rank with the most difficult in the state?

You'll be hard pressed to find many "punishing" courses in the Houston area. The LINKS at Quail Valley is probably the most punishing with significant water hazards on 15 of the 18 holes. The short tees at Agnes Moffitt Park are, in my opinion, the easiest 18 holes in Houston proper.


Here's my completely unscientific crack at ranking the Houston area 12+ hole courses based on how hard it is to score well for a skilled typical Amateur player (whatever that is). It wouldn't take much to convince me to swing a course one or two spots either way...

vvv Hardest vvv
Shawshank
Jack Brooks – Cedar Hills (note that this course is still in flux)
Spring Valley - Total 27
The LINKS - Largo/white tees
Tom Bass: Wilmont
River Grove
Spring Valley - Finesse 18
Oak Meadows Park - White/medium tees
Tom Bass: Powell - Long tees
MacGregor Park - Gold/long tees (21 holes)
The LINKS - Blue tees
McDade Park
Jack Brooks – Gulf Meadows
MacGregor Park - Red/medium tees (21 holes)
Dunbar - Long tees
Bear Branch Park - Blue tees
The LINKS - Red tees
MacGregor Park - Blue/short tees (21 holes)
Agnes Moffitt Park - Red/long
Nottingham Park - Long tees
Nottingham Park - Short tees
Agnes Moffitt Park - Green/short
Dunbar - Short tees
^^^ Easiest ^^^

Haven't played these yet:
Bear Branch Park - Red tees
Bear Branch Park - White tees

Never been played because they're completely unmarked:
Oak Meadows Park - Red/short tees
Oak Meadows Park - Blue/long tees
 
I have played Shawshank, and it's definitely the hardest of any course on this list, but I didn't include it in the list because I felt it was simply too far from the greater Houston area. This was the case with Dunbar as well, although that is one I haven't played. I basically went from downtown out about 50 miles, which makes Dunbar a toss up.

Other thoughts: I do like Eric's list, but I chose not to separate the difficulty based on tees. Spring Valley is one course with two sections, so I considered it one course and ranked it holistically. I will also admit that it's been a long time since playing River Grove and Spring Valley, so it's all with a grain of salt - even though my DG memory is pretty decent. :D

Wow - Oak Meadow is the 2nd hardest??!! I have only played that & Agnes Moffitt (which is a middle of the road or slightly lower course), but Oak Meadow was not hard/punishing at all. It is long to be sure, but the vast majority of holes do not have much punishment for bad shots and/or bad decisions. I do not know much about TX DG, but how does it rank with the most difficult in the state?

IMO - All Houston courses are going to be in the lower tiers as far as difficulty when giving a state comparison. Most DFW and Austin or other area courses I've played are much better and harder than what Houston has to offer. However, it is worth noting that Houston is always going to be at the disadvantage simply because the terrain and elevations don't have as much to offer.

Also, water is always a big consideration, but IMO water doesn't make always make the challenge greater, it just forces to you to think about your shot a little more. The LINKS is a great example of a long water filled course that doesn't challenge you in any other way. Some would say that the water is enough, I always think their should be other design elements that should be factored in with it. But - as always, that's just my biased opinion. :rolleyes:
 
Wow - Oak Meadow is the 2nd hardest??!! I have only played that & Agnes Moffitt (which is a middle of the road or slightly lower course), but Oak Meadow was not hard/punishing at all. It is long to be sure, but the vast majority of holes do not have much punishment for bad shots and/or bad decisions. I do not know much about TX DG, but how does it rank with the most difficult in the state?

I guess you didn't notice all the thorns in the underbrush like I did. :)
 
I stayed on the fairways actually - they were quite ample. I did throw my favorite Starfire into the drink though on one of the last holes. :D

I see the smiley so this is not directed at you, but I think it is funny that some people think of that kind of issue as punishment in a golf sense. If your score is not punished (ala, you pay at least one extra stroke for a bad throw compared to if the course was totally open), it is not golf punishment.

Same with risk/reward - I've seen people saying the "prairie grass provides great risk/reward". That is true if golf risk is having to look for your disc, but risk/reward applies to scoring. I suppose it is a risk to your score if you and your group cannot find it in a tournament before the 3 minute rule expires, but I do not think that is what they mean.
 
I stayed on the fairways actually - they were quite ample. I did throw my favorite Starfire into the drink though on one of the last holes.

To be fair - at least 1/3 of the holes through the woods and are pretty tight, and the 2/3 that are not are either big water holes, or 350+ - which makes things much harder on short of the tee players. Plus in the forest part - tight undergrowth is a factor no matter who you are.

Holes 8,9, and 10 are the big water holes, so you may be thinking of hole #10 - it has swallowed numerous discs of mine. Also, I think my original definition of hard is working for par, and therefore every hole at Oak Meadows makes you work for par - there are no gimmies like on most courses in Houston. The LINKS or maybe Spring Valley is about the only other course in the area that can say that.

Again, comparatively speaking I have playing harder courses in the Texas and other states, but it still is one of the most difficult by Houston standards.
 
Other thoughts: I do like Eric's list, but I chose not to separate the difficulty based on tees.

But you almost have to do that. MacGregor blue plays far easier than MacGregor gold. And the difference between the red tees at the LINKS and the white/Largo tees is like fighting Glass Joe vs. Mike Tyson in NES Punch Out!!


Also, water is always a big consideration, but IMO water doesn't make always make the challenge greater, it just forces to you to think about your shot a little more. The LINKS is a great example of a long water filled course that doesn't challenge you in any other way. Some would say that the water is enough, I always think their should be other design elements that should be factored in with it. But - as always, that's just my biased opinion. :rolleyes:

Wait... "water doesn't increase the challenge"??? :confused: The LINKS is a HUGE risk/reward course on a magnified scale because not only does that risk come with a penalty stroke it also probably costs you a disc as well.

As far as increasing the challenge at the LINKS with factors other than water, Neal has been working with the city to get more trees planted out there. Sadly, some of the few that were there didn't survive hurricane IKE last year.


Re: Oak Meadow
I stayed on the fairways actually - they were quite ample.

Oak Meadow is the type of course that if let go becomes a lot more difficult as the fairways will grow in on themselves. So if you played relatively soon after the course was installed it was probably more open then it has been recently. Before the Birdshot tournament this year several staffers were out there clearing some/many/most of the overgrowth to restore the course to the designer's intent.

Also, Oak Meadows isn't a very well balanced course so it's probably much easier for a RHBH/LHFH thrower than it is for the folks throwing with opposite motions. There's an over abundance of RHBH hyzer holes on the course.


Also, I think my original definition of hard is working for par, and therefore every hole at Oak Meadows makes you work for par - there are no gimmies like on most courses in Houston. The LINKS or maybe Spring Valley is about the only other course in the area that can say that.

A huge part of that position needs to be "what is par?". The designer put a "par 3" label on all the tees of #12 including the 654' and 821' tees. Even if it was wide open (it is) with no hazards (it's not; there's an OB stream close to the basket) that's not a par 3 hole.

And if I understand it correctly you're saying there are no gimme 3's (par) at Oak Meadows...? If all you're doing is trying for 3's and no 2's there are several gimme 3's....
Hole #1 @ 321' almost completely wide open should be a gimme 3.
Hole #2 @ 309' short shot before the ditch, second shot over the ditch for a gimme 3.
Hole #5 @ 323' is an easy 200' shot followed by a pretty easy upshot for 3.
Hole #13 @ 260' is a safe drive and safe upshot for what should be a gimme 3.
Hole #15 @ 299' same deal, straight shots all the way.

Where Oak Meadows lures you into it's trap is the allure of the 2. Throwing the shots that are necessary to give you a reasonable putt for 2 are more risky than playing for the safe 3's. That's where you get into trouble.
 
But you almost have to do that. MacGregor blue plays far easier than MacGregor gold. And the difference between the red tees at the LINKS and the white/Largo tees is like fighting Glass Joe vs. Mike Tyson in NES Punch Out!!

It's a consideration, but just like a can't separate reviews into three reviews for the same course because they have different tees - I'm not separating the tees in my ranking. Again, I view it simply at looking at the course holistically and just weigh it in the differences in my final opinions.

Wait... "water doesn't increase the challenge"??? :confused: The LINKS is a HUGE risk/reward course on a magnified scale because not only does that risk come with a penalty stroke it also probably costs you a disc as well.

As far as increasing the challenge at the LINKS with factors other than water, Neal has been working with the city to get more trees planted out there. Sadly, some of the few that were there didn't survive hurricane IKE last year.

It's not that water doesn't increase the challenge, so maybe I conveyed my POV incorrectly, but you have emphasized my thought by noting the lack of additional factors. What do you consider harder - Towne Lake or the LINKS? Both are long with water - however the design of Towne Lake with the additional factors like defined fairways and foliage make it a harder course. That is all I'm trying to say.

Oak Meadow is the type of course that if let go becomes a lot more difficult as the fairways will grow in on themselves. So if you played relatively soon after the course was installed it was probably more open then it has been recently. Before the Birdshot tournament this year several staffers were out there clearing some/many/most of the overgrowth to restore the course to the designer's intent.

Also a good point - since Oak Meadows can play extremely tight also depending on the time of year and maintenance, which again - is a factor I considered.

A huge part of that position needs to be "what is par?". The designer put a "par 3" label on all the tees of #12 including the 654' and 821' tees. Even if it was wide open (it is) with no hazards (it's not; there's an OB stream close to the basket) that's not a par 3 hole.

It's not, and I've always said that. It's a big gripe I have with Andi's final designs and why I've always said that Houck courses do the right job at looking at what is par. However, hole #12 does still say par 3 and if you're in a tournament there - you're playing it as a par 3 unless you start making up rules - so yeah, that's pretty difficult. Not particular good or fair - or even make sense IMO - but difficult.

And if I understand it correctly you're saying there are no gimme 3's (par) at Oak Meadows...? If all you're doing is trying for 3's and no 2's there are several gimme 3's....
Hole #1 @ 321' almost completely wide open should be a gimme 3.
Hole #2 @ 309' short shot before the ditch, second shot over the ditch for a gimme 3.
Hole #5 @ 323' is an easy 200' shot followed by a pretty easy upshot for 3.
Hole #13 @ 260' is a safe drive and safe upshot for what should be a gimme 3.
Hole #15 @ 299' same deal, straight shots all the way.

Where Oak Meadows lures you into it's trap is the allure of the 2. Throwing the shots that are necessary to give you a reasonable putt for 2 are more risky than playing for the safe 3's. That's where you get into trouble.

Hole #1 - About the only hole where you have a good argument. Open and shorter in comparison, but is this easy for you, mister I can drive #6 if I want to, or someone like David who is 250' off the teebox?

Hole #2 - Not a gimmie since how many times have you thrown right into the overgrown ditch of death. Or gone left and had your disc settle behind the trees 70' away and had to pull off a big shot to get within 20'?

Hole #5 - 10' to the right and your second shot is blind and you have to make the corner. 10' left and your in that gigantic bush trying to tomahawk your disc out to get it close. Gimmie?

Hole #13 - Shortest of all the holes - but if you miss that line into the cove where the basket is you're playing in undergrowth for your next shot going for a pin that is heavily guarded from all sides ecexpt that 8' gap you were going for on the drive. Should you still get a 3 if you're decent? Yes. Gimmie? hmmmm...

Hole #15 - Don't even get me started on that hole. Isn't that the hole where you managed to literally knock a log out of the tree? 10' feet right or left at anytime and your playing mostly blind from the undergrowth. A good drive with only a light fade should get you par, but you're not guaranteed it by any means. Heck I think #18 is easier than #13 or #15.

Eric - bottom line, when I think gimmie I think #8 at Agnes Moffitt or #9 at Terramont. It's a hole that you should be going for bird every time, but should never get worse than a 3. There is not a single hole at Oak Meadows where you walk away with a 3 an think oh man would people make fun of me for not getting that easy bird.
 
Just got back from Burke crenshaw and they just installed 7 brand new holes (old baskets) , two of the old pen placements are unmoved but have new tee locations. Now it goes around the jogging path down the other road to the back side of the park , where old #2 stopped and you use to go back now it goes past that and curves along the road. Where old tee #2 was they added a new tee 10 ft infront of that and you throw at that group of trees 450+ away .

Right now its just 7 holes , the last one finishing back by the restrooms at the back of the park , its really cool hole up a 6 foot hill, not sure how they are gonna work back to one as its still a work in progress. If anyone wants to know more ask me a question and answer what i know about whats there now.
 
I see the smiley so this is not directed at you, but I think it is funny that some people think of that kind of issue as punishment in a golf sense. If your score is not punished (ala, you pay at least one extra stroke for a bad throw compared to if the course was totally open), it is not golf punishment.

Just don't tell my legs there is no punishment. Sometimes they look like I just got in a fight with a cat.

Hole #1 - About the only hole where you have a good argument. Open and shorter in comparison, but is this easy for you, mister I can drive #6 if I want to, or someone like David who is 250' off the teebox?

Oh sure, drag me through the mud... David can only throw 250... ;)

Just my 2 cents about Oak Meadow. My best hole is #1 with an average score of 3.20 after playing the course 20 times. I realize I might not be typical, but this is the only course I can think of where I've never had a birdie. For me that makes it hard. I haven't played the Links or Shawshank though.
 
Just got back from Burke crenshaw and they just installed 7 brand new holes (old baskets) , two of the old pen placements are unmoved but have new tee locations. Now it goes around the jogging path down the other road to the back side of the park , where old #2 stopped and you use to go back now it goes past that and curves along the road. Where old tee #2 was they added a new tee 10 ft infront of that and you throw at that group of trees 450+ away .

Right now its just 7 holes , the last one finishing back by the restrooms at the back of the park , its really cool hole up a 6 foot hill, not sure how they are gonna work back to one as its still a work in progress. If anyone wants to know more ask me a question and answer what i know about whats there now.


Awesome! At least it's not being killed off. Thanks for letting us know.
 
Just don't tell my legs there is no punishment. Sometimes they look like I just got in a fight with a cat.



Oh sure, drag me through the mud... David can only throw 250... ;)

Just my 2 cents about Oak Meadow. My best hole is #1 with an average score of 3.20 after playing the course 20 times. I realize I might not be typical, but this is the only course I can think of where I've never had a birdie. For me that makes it hard. I haven't played the Links or Shawshank though.

Sorry dude, but your scorebook helps me prove my point. You're a great DG'er that is not that long off the tee, so a course like Oak Meadow is going to be inherently harder than other courses. And since you have probably played Oak Meadows more than any other person on this site - you're stats speak the biggest volumes.

Total Rounds Played: 20
332 Total Holes Played
23.64 Miles Total Distance Covered
68.24 / 62 Average Score / Best Score
1.37 Average Putts per Hole
1254 Total Shots
0 Total Aces
0 Total Double Eagles
0 Total Eagles
0 Total Birdies
125 Total Pars
165 Total Bogies
34 Total Double Bogies
7 Total Triple Bogies
 
It's a consideration, but just like a can't separate reviews into three reviews for the same course because they have different tees - I'm not separating the tees in my ranking. Again, I view it simply at looking at the course holistically and just weigh it in the differences in my final opinions.

For a course like Moffitt or Nottingham where the two sets of tees are not significantly different that's doable. But longs vs. shorts at MacGregor or the LINKS are two different courses and ranking them as one in terms of difficulty/challenge/hardness is then accurate for neither.


What do you consider harder - Towne Lake or the LINKS? Both are long with water - however the design of Towne Lake with the additional factors like defined fairways and foliage make it a harder course. That is all I'm trying to say.

To me, right now, I'd say Towne Lake is harder.

But hardness of Towne Lake vs. The LINKS depends a lot on how far you can throw. If you can clear the water at The LINKS it's not that hard of a course in normal wind conditions. But if you're a short thrower you might have more difficulty at the LINKS.


It's a big gripe I have with Andi's final designs and why I've always said that Houck courses do the right job at looking at what is par. However, hole #12 does still say par 3 and if you're in a tournament there - you're playing it as a par 3 unless you start making up rules - so yeah, that's pretty difficult. Not particular good or fair - or even make sense IMO - but difficult.

Well if you're playing in a tournament the par of the hole only matters if you're late to start and miss the hole. Once you've thrown your first disc (in a tournament) any notion of "par" is meaningless for all practical purposes.


Hole #1 - About the only hole where you have a good argument. Open and shorter in comparison, but is this easy for you, mister I can drive #6 if I want to, or someone like David who is 250' off the teebox?

Hole #2 - Not a gimmie since how many times have you thrown right into the overgrown ditch of death. Or gone left and had your disc settle behind the trees 70' away and had to pull off a big shot to get within 20'?

Hole #5 - 10' to the right and your second shot is blind and you have to make the corner. 10' left and your in that gigantic bush trying to tomahawk your disc out to get it close. Gimmie?

Hole #13 - Shortest of all the holes - but if you miss that line into the cove where the basket is you're playing in undergrowth for your next shot going for a pin that is heavily guarded from all sides ecexpt that 8' gap you were going for on the drive. Should you still get a 3 if you're decent? Yes. Gimmie? hmmmm...

Hole #15 - Don't even get me started on that hole. Isn't that the hole where you managed to literally knock a log out of the tree? 10' feet right or left at anytime and your playing mostly blind from the undergrowth. A good drive with only a light fade should get you par, but you're not guaranteed it by any means. Heck I think #18 is easier than #13 or #15.

Eric - bottom line, when I think gimmie I think #8 at Agnes Moffitt or #9 at Terramont. It's a hole that you should be going for bird every time, but should never get worse than a 3. There is not a single hole at Oak Meadows where you walk away with a 3 an think oh man would people make fun of me for not getting that easy bird.

Your original statement was:
I think my original definition of hard is working for par, and therefore every hole at Oak Meadows makes you work for par - there are no gimmies like on most courses in Houston.
I read that to me "no gimme pars", i.e. "no gimme 3's".

IMO there are several easy 3's at Oak Meadow. Holes where people would laugh at me if I didn't get a 3 on that hole.

Moffitt #8 and definitely Terramont #9 should be par 2's, if that existed.

We could debate individual holes ad nauseam... I did knock a log out of the tree on #15, but that's because I pulled the disc high trying to park it for a 2!

I think if the average AM player played Oak Meadow with the mind set of getting 3's on every hole they would probably score better overall then if they went out shooting for 2's. Standing on the tee your goal is not to get the disc as close to the basket as possible. In fact if your tee shot is within 60' of the basket you automatically lose. Your goal off the tee is to take the easiest first shot that gives you the easiest second shot to have a makable putt for 3.

So the example on hole #2 is you don't try to cross the ditch off the tee, that's what gets players in trouble. Lay up in front of the ditch off the tee. The second shot is an easy ~100' upshot under the basket. But everyone at our level is greedy and sees a 309' hole and wants the 2. That's what gets them in trouble!

So now we're arguing semantics but by your definition of "hard" (working for par, '3' in this case) I don't think Oak Meadows is as hard as you believe. I favor a definition of hard that is more related to how difficult it is to score well. That encompasses the punishment suffered when trying to go for risk/reward shots. E.g. the reward of carding a 2 on #2 is balanced by the risk of ending up in the ditch of death, or sailing left into the trees 70' from the basket, or turning over too much and falling in the brush right of the ditch crossing. But that hole should be an easy/gimme 3, if you play it for that.
 
My own hole-by-hole stats of Oak Meadow attached (playing everything there as Par 3). Par/3 is not that hard to come by. Birds/2s for a player at my level are far less common than the Bogies/4s you get trying to execute the shot necessary to get in position for a 2.
 

Attachments

  • oakmeadowstats.jpg
    oakmeadowstats.jpg
    80 KB · Views: 8
So with you having a player rating of 926, a good number by many standards are only yielding a birdie less than 5% of the time at Oak Meadows versus over 11% at the LINKS. Seems like a tougher course.

Plus, your par rate is better at the LINKS as well. It just seems to me when I think Gimmie - I think should be a birdie, but never worse than a par. If my theory is true than Oak Meadows holds strong on not yielding easy holes to birdie, but your point holds water that playing conservatively may yield more pars than I give it credit for.

However, having said that - you still average half a stroke worse at Oak Meadows. :)
 
Top