Click To View Golf Course Page

Discussions in Travel & Golf Destinations Discussions
Moderated By CPennbo, JohnnyGK, kviser, Paisano, thingstodo

Travel & Golf Destinations Discussions
Rancho San Marcos

TOPIC: Rancho San Marcos


Listing 1 to 3 of 3 Replies

Rancho San Marcos
Member Since:
    November 6, 2004

Favorite Golfer:
    Fred Couples
Favorite Golf Course:
    Rustic Canyon

Tuesday June 27, 2017 5:38 AM
Read some fairly recent reviews HERE saying RSM was green again and generally worthwhile to play.

Just got word from a friend who played there LAST WEEK saying "played there last week -- very disappointed in that the fairways and greens were not in good shape and in my opinion would not be good for quite awhile. I think they still have a water problem...I would not return."

So, before spending the time and money to give RSM a go, I'd like someone to please offer up an objective opinion on this issue.
 Message #84425
RE: Rancho San Marcos


GK Event: Played in a GK Event

Member Since:
    December 30, 2002

Favorite Golfer:
Favorite Golf Course:

Tuesday June 27, 2017 5:41 AM
Ask and you shall receive - LOL - review by GK Guru Nickesquire posted minutes ago.

Does not sound nearly as bad as your friend is making it out to be ...

Rancho San Marcos Golf Course
Santa Barbara, CA
Reviewed by: Nickesquire, Simi Valley, CA

Played the Blacks (6939/73.9/137) with 140ver, Pat & Mark in sunny, breezy, mid 70's weather conditions. The POP was around 4 1/2H.

RSM is a challenging diverse, fun layout with numerous elevation changes complete with great scenic and wildlife views. Many holes have places that you are likely to lose a ball if you miss the fairway by more than a few yards. Numerous forced carries, this course is well deserving of it's high slope rating.

Before I get into my description, this was a very tough course to rate because 85% is lush to very lush... however, the other 15% is poor, and there often is 1" between the two extremes with no mediocre in between. VERY playable but with more water in some rough around the edges areas it could be excellent.

The tees were generally in decent condition. Most had good coverage and some could be considered lush. However, many were unlevel and needed leveling more than most courses.

The fairways were generally lush and good to play from. However, there were patches of hardpan in every fairway right beside large lush areas.

The rough was also generally good but more hit & miss. In a 10 yard circle your lie could range from hardpan to not too deep to having to step on your ball to find it. The rough is generally penal however, because you almost never had even a semi good lie. If you missed the primary cut, it's likely a lost ball, the native rough grows wild and is very deep in many spots.

The large sand traps are abundant on this layout. The middle parts of the traps where your ball was likely to end up were well maintained but often too thin. The outer edges of the traps (roughly 2' around most outer edges) were crusty & almost hardpan. They needed more manual maintenance.

The greens putted well (** read on), medium fast & very firm. They were the best part of the course, I liked the way they rolled. They could be challenging to chip on because of their firmness. You needed to be able to spin the ball to chip effectively on these greens. **This rating would be MUCH higher if nearly every green did not have dozens and dozens of unfixed ball marks in various stages of disrepair. If you had a 40' putt, you probably needed to repair 5 old ball marks in your line before putting.

No marshall or drink cart, but there were plenty of water stations on the course. The customer service was excellent in the pro shop and with the cart attendant out front. We had lunch afterward, good selection & good food at moderately high prices. I really liked the course layout, it was well worth the drive.

[[Edited by JohnnyGK on Tuesday June 27, 2017 5:42 AM]]
GK is now on FACEBOOK! CLICK HERE and become a fan!
 Message #84426 - This was a reply to message #84425
RE: Rancho San Marcos
GK Event: Played in a GK Event

Member Since:
    August 11, 2007

Favorite Golfer:
    Jack, Freddie, Tiger
Favorite Golf Course:
    Maderas Olivas Sherwood

Tuesday June 27, 2017 5:52 AM
Just played there twice this past weekend. Read my detailed review that covers all aspects of what you may expect to find... from the good to the bad.

QUOTED  "played there last week -- very disappointed in that the fairways and greens were not in good shape and in my opinion would not be good for quite awhile. I think they still have a water problem...I would not return."

While RSM is NOT in pristine condition, I would disagree with that analysis... it was quite playable, even more so if you do not try and play the ball as it lies like I do. The 3some I played with all mowed their balls to preferred lies which takes everything bad out of the equation EXCEPT all the ball marks on the greens.

I would presume that RSM is a destination golf course and probably gets a much lesser amount of play from repeat locals than most courses? My theory is that many of the destination players paying a high daily fee are less likely to repair ball marks than locals playing there consistently?

At any rate, regardless of the reason... The high % of old ball marks on the greens is definitely a golfer issue...

This is a separate issue concerning RSM, but it affects the play ability of the course...

jerinthebox in a recent course review stated...

"First and foremost: this place needs a set of blue tees so badly. Whites are 6200yds, Blacks are 6900, and to have nothing in between them is ridiculous. It's bad for pace of play and it's annoying to feel pressure from the group behind because they're waiting at the tee box that just happens to be like halfway up your fairway if you played from the blacks. It seems like this would only inhibit pace and enjoyment, and I'm not sure I'd return unless they addressed this very simple issue."

PERFECT ANALYSIS for all the reasons stated. I played one round from the Blacks which are too long and severe overall for my game. I played one round from the Whites that are so far up from the Blacks on numerous holes that it took Driver out of play on numerous par 4's. They DEFINITELY need a tee box in between, roughly a 6500 yard option.

The yardage differences per hole in the Blacks/Whites are EXTREME in many cases...

1- 75 yards (Par 5)
2- 30 yards (Par 3)
3- 65 yards
4- 42 yards
5- 36 yards (Par 3)
6- 44 yards (Par 5)
7- 14 yards (Par 3)
8- 46 yards
9- 33 yards
10- 18 yards (Par 5)
11- 25 yards
12- 25 yards (Par 5)
13- 21 yards (Par 3)
14- 18 yards (Par 3)
15- 53 yards
16- 24 yards (Par 3)
17- 68 yards
18- 24 yards (Par 5)

+143 yards on 6 par 3's = average of 24 extra yards per par 3 hole. So +2/3 clubs for the average golfer.
+186 yards on 5 par 5's = average of 37 extra yards per par 5 hole.

However, it's adding 332 yards on the seven par 4's that completely change the complexion of this course. That's an average of 47 yards per par 4? That is adding roughly 5 extra clubs on the approach shot for the average golfer?

Most of the biggest gaps turn a long par 4 into a short par 4. It literally plays like 2 separate golf courses with that kind of extremes... and there are no Black/White combo tees, which could go a long ways toward solving the issue w/o adding additional tee boxes?

[[Edited by Nickesquire on Tuesday July 4, 2017 12:14 PM]]
The goal is long and straight! But on the many times I cannot seem to hit them straight, I at least want to hit them long!
 Message #84427 - This was a reply to message #84425

Listing 1 to 3 of 3 Replies


[ Community Page ]