We do not live at RP and only visit on weekends, however; plan to live there FT in about 3-5 years. We have purchased another lot (on the lake) and plan to build as soon as we can afford it.

The 6th course has been announced and it will be a Dye course…. we are so VERY excited about it and cannot wait to join it as well… but, my only concern is how much they will want and will some of the members say no because they are pissed off about the CC. That’s the rumor… but, we will see.

As avid golfers… we know that ANY money spent at RP toward golf and golf memberships is WELL worth it… people can bitch all they want about the CC but I LOVE IT!!! Like I mentioned at the beginning… if it were the ONLY club I belonged to… then NO WAY…. but as a 5th… it’s great!

I do think they should have let folks had an opportunity to play before they joined but that is the way it is there… nothing we can do about that. But now, it seems unfair that a non CC member cannot even go there as a guest one time to see if he wanted to join. But, then again, that keeps the “private” aspect there.

Most of the members I know are only upset about there being so MANY members as they were told it would be limited to either 300-400 (don’t know) and now there are porbably 1000 and they are pissed about that…. Can’t blame them there… we were never told that so I cannot comment there.

The course is fantastic and I cannot say anything negative except I wish they had simpler “quick” food to eat (i.e. at the turn) or something rather than it being so fancy…

They have increased the length of the rough off the fairways and around some greens. This tends to keep the ball from rolling onto the green “rewarding bad shots” as some dislike.

I’ve never heard that 1/3 of the folks want their membership refunded. I’m not sure that this is all the members favorite course, but my wife and friends enjoy playing it IN ADDITION to the other courses available at Reynolds. I would not want to play it every day but I think that the number of available courses to play at Reynolds keeps it interesting and is certainly part of why one would join and enjoy the facilities.

The other nice thing about the course is the Creek Club clubhouse. It’s a fantastic facility and has excellent food, excellent (and reasonable) wine selection and an excellent, approachable chef. Not that Georgia’s, Linger Longer, Great Waters and Plantation aren’t very good restaurants as well, but like the golf course, the restaurant is unique. The Crow’s Nest is a bar/special events area on the second floor overlooking a great view of the 18th par 5. It’s certainly worth part of the membership.

In terms of the membership money, it’s 100% equity so essentially you’re giving them a loan of $10K that you get back should you leave the entire 5 courses membership. The monthly dues are really what you pay permanently, not the $10K. And as you point out, if/when the 6th course is available you will probably have to have joined the Creek Club to get access (maybe?).

Not every course has to be “kick your butt” difficult. For those of us (and friends) that don’t play every day, it’s nice to go to a course that might give us a break every now and then and walk away feeling like we played a very interesting course and had a score that wants us to come back for more.

Lastly, it’s very easy to get a tee time and a reservation at the restaurant. At some of the other Reynold’s courses it’s more difficult to get reservations especially if you have the 10-day-out membership instead of the 30-day-out.

Anyway, I’d think that if as many members are in revolt over the course as you indicate that the ability to continue to build private courses may very well be in jeopardy with the membership scheme. It’s likely the next course will be public, if for no other reason than that they won’t be able to get the members – even if it is Pete Dye.

While I don’t think an instance of a lost ball is a good litmus test for the fairness of the golf course, I do see your point about continuous feeding of golf balls back to the green. Part of the repetitive problem of the Creek Club are all the punch bowl greens. However, with the mounding around the greens and the severity of the greens, that may have been necessary to keep the course playable. I certainly had some very difficult up and downs from just off the green the day I played.

I hope over time that at least some of those who dislike the golf course come to at least appreciate the uniqueness of the course – of course when we’re talking about the kind of investment that these folks put into it, and the hard feelings associated with the bizarre (but business savvy) membership methods at Reynolds, that may not be possible.

In so far as lists and rankings are concerned, I have no idea where this course will end up since it’s likely that this will be the only course that opened in 2007 that I’ll play. I don’t put much into lists or rankings anyway, which is why you won’t find those here.

Thanks again for the comments.

In order to maximize the appeal as a resale property, the level of one’s existing membership is paramount because many properties cannot upgrade to a higher level of membership than what currently exists; thus, many people join each new golf course as a hedge for the time that they may want to leave and go elsewhere.

Once someone “passes” on an upgrade of their membership, it becomes frozen at that level. Doing so, thus, limits future resale values as compared to properties that are at the highest existing level.

Management and the sales team are very adept at how this is manipulated in pitting “resales” to new prospective purchasers of land and company owned and developed properties being offered to the market.

That said, the Engh golf course was joined by 900 members who had NOT seen the course in any nearly finished form and had certainly not played it. The requirement to join was a $10,000 deposit payable by April 30, 2006……when very little sod had been laid on the front nine, and the back nine was still being graded, with no real access back there to see it. The balance was due June 1, 2007, and there was no option to back out and get your initial deposit back. In other words, people are “stuck” whether they like to course or not.

When member play begin in May of this year, the word spread very quickly about the overall severity of the course with respect to the mounding, the undulations of the greens and the forced carries to the uphill greens. The green speeds have not gone unnoticed here, either.

While this season’s drought certainly has affected the grow in of the new sod, Reynolds does have accessibility for drawing thousands of gallons of water from Lake Oconee for each of its courses, so members are a bit perplexed that 14, 15, and 16 have not faired nearly as well as the rest of the course…….cart path only on these holes is still in effect.

Even so, many people feel that four golf courses (Plantation, Great Waters, National, and Oconee) are now sufficiently varied enough that the saleability of their properties will not be as diminished in the future the way it has been in the past.

As to my comment about the skills level, my reference there is for the typical golfer in this private setting, where the average age is above 55, and the average handicap is higher than 18. Were I still under 40 and carrying a 8 or better handicap, and I might not have made the comment about the skills test.

On my initial playing of the course, I put a shot into #10 that came up short of the green, but above the bunker. The Zoysia ate the ball, never could locate where it even entered the embankment, and keep in mind the course was not wet……..drought, remember………but none of us could locate the ball. Everyone saw the shot, and everyone knew where it, essentially, landed, but no one could locate it…………….fair test of golf??

Last point, I go back to the more than overly generous slope around each green that feeds even a 20 yard off line shot back onto the green for a potential par. Is this a true test of a golfer’s skill, no matter his handicap?

From a member’s point ov view, and I know this is shared my many members that have now played in more than once, the consensus locally is simply “…it’s tricked up and a bit hokey………….”

As to the new, and not yet officially announced sixth golf course, the local rumor is that Pete Dye is the architect, not Tiger. One member that I know quite well is extremely close to the golf staff and Bob Mauragas, and he implies that Mauragas has confirmed to him that Dye is the architect upcoming for the next course.

Lastly, I have never met Jim Engh, and I have no reason to attack him on a personal level, but there certainly are a lot of very disappointed members in what he created here. Many of us will laugh long and hard if it gets voted anything near a Best of Anything for design. Reynolds gave him some not so prime land to work with, and perhaps he did the best that he could with it, but that still doesn’t make it a jewel.

Your criticisms of the course are certainly fair. I lamented the lack of a ground game in my review of the course. I think that’s unfortunate and a mistake.

If you could expand on a couple of your points, I think it could be an interesting discussion.

You mentioned that the fairways reward even poor shots. This is something I also mentioned in my review – that the containment is repetitive. But the course is very wide, meaning that poor shots would likely stay “in play” without the containment. However, while the course is easy off the tee, as you point out, the greens are an incredible test. To me, I like the philosophy that as you get closer to the green, the greater the challenge. By keeping most shots in play off the tee, it gives you a reasonable chance to take on the greens.

I agree with you that the slope ratings are too high and it’s my understanding that those are in the process of being revised.

I’m surprised to hear that 1/3 (or more) of the membership is so disappointed in the course that they would want their money back. By the same token, I’m curious how many put money down for membership prior to playing the course. This is definitely a “Bobby Knight” course – you either like it or you really hate it. And of those 900 members, how many are members because they bought real estate speculatively to get the membership?

Finally, you mentioned that the course is not a legitimate test of golfing skills. Could you expand on that?

I’m certainly not here to carry the water for Engh, Reynolds or the Creek Club. It’s not a course that I would join or even want to play every day. But I certainly appreciate it’s distinct differences from the other courses at Reynolds.

Again, thanks for sharing your thoughts.

My initial round on this new course was with a couple of experienced golfers…….husband and wife……and the wife was a much better golfer than the husband.

When we got to #13, she was finally so frustrated with the layout and undulating greens, and the rewards for sloped fairways that rewarded even poor shots, that she commented to her husband….”this is where they should have put the clowns or the windmill….”

There are no “run-ups” anywhere, so if one cannot get the ball into the air, there is no hope for scoring.

On the other hand, if you can get the ball into the air, you can score quite well, but the initial very high slope ratings will truly skew your handicap if you turn in a lower score than usual.

There were almost 900 people that joined this new course, and perhaps as many as 300, or more, would dearly love to have their money back, as those of us who feel this way do not feel that his course is a legitimate test of golfing skills and worthy of the money that we paid……..Reynolds Plantation, as a company, obviously doesn’t feel this way, but those of us locally feel that if the golfing media begins to award this course with grandious accolades and awards, then it is obvious that the advertising dollar is more important to purchasing these awards than the actual accomplishment of the design and playability.

Jim Engh may very well be talented, but few here think that he has contributed to a legitimate golfing experience with this rather ackward design that otherwise utilizes only the poorest of the real estate offerings that Reynolds allowed him to work with…..yes, it is a “creek course” because it winds its way around all of the severely low lands and/or the severest of hillsides that were otherwise unbuildable for housing……..

I want my money back for this mistake in my personal judgement.