Pine at McCormick Ranch Golf Club

About
The Pine Course at the McCormick Ranch Golf Club offers mature pines, in an appropriate contrast to its sibling golf course, the Pine Course, and is also narrower than the other golf course. What they have in common include the facts that Desmond Muirhead designed both of them and they both date back to 1972; recent renovations have also given both golf courses new greens, sand traps and bridges.
The Pine at McCormick Ranch Golf Club measures 7,187 yards, kicking off on a 398-yard par 4 that requires tee shot toward the fairway's center, leaving golfers a mid- to short-iron from the green, which slopes narrowly. Things get long by the fourth hole, one of four par-5 holes that come in at over 500 yards; this one, for example, makes you place your drive well toward right-center if you want to shoot for it in two. Close out the round of golf on the 18th hole, another long one, at 517 yards from the blue tees, and a tight hole to drive that will, thankfully, provide your last test for the day.
Tee | Par | Length | Rating | Slope |
---|---|---|---|---|
Blue | 72 | 7187 yards | 74.3 | 130 |
Blue/White | 72 | 6734 yards | 72.2 | 128 |
White | 72 | 6371 yards | 70.5 | 127 |
White (W) | 72 | 6371 yards | 75.9 | 129 |
Brown | 72 | 5993 yards | 68.7 | 119 |
Brown (W) | 72 | 5993 yards | 73.8 | 125 |
Red | 72 | 5333 yards | 65.1 | 114 |
Red (W) | 72 | 5333 yards | 70.2 | 115 |
Hole | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | Out | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | In | Total |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Blue M: 74.3/130 | 398 | 387 | 390 | 537 | 185 | 419 | 599 | 211 | 434 | 3560 | 410 | 443 | 579 | 218 | 404 | 470 | 401 | 185 | 517 | 3627 | 7187 |
Blue/White M: 72.0/128 | 398 | 387 | 390 | 537 | 141 | 419 | 556 | 175 | 365 | 3368 | 410 | 370 | 519 | 178 | 404 | 401 | 401 | 166 | 517 | 3366 | 6734 |
White M: 70.5/127 W: 75.9/129 | 341 | 354 | 355 | 511 | 141 | 383 | 556 | 175 | 365 | 3181 | 363 | 370 | 519 | 178 | 342 | 401 | 372 | 166 | 479 | 3190 | 6371 |
White/Brown M: 69.5/123 W: 74.9/127 | 341 | 354 | 355 | 511 | 109 | 383 | 533 | 141 | 357 | 3084 | 363 | 350 | 497 | 158 | 342 | 375 | 372 | 144 | 479 | 3080 | 6164 |
Brown M: 68.7/119 W: 73.8/125 | 322 | 343 | 333 | 487 | 109 | 368 | 533 | 141 | 357 | 2993 | 335 | 350 | 497 | 158 | 318 | 375 | 357 | 144 | 466 | 3000 | 5993 |
Red M: 65.1/114 W: 70.2/115 | 289 | 308 | 310 | 469 | 96 | 336 | 468 | 125 | 326 | 2727 | 276 | 320 | 476 | 115 | 271 | 277 | 328 | 100 | 443 | 2606 | 5333 |
Handicap | 14 | 12 | 8 | 6 | 18 | 4 | 2 | 16 | 10 | 13 | 7 | 3 | 15 | 11 | 1 | 9 | 17 | 5 | |||
Par | 4 | 4 | 4 | 5 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 3 | 4 | 36 | 4 | 4 | 5 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 3 | 5 | 36 | 72 |
Course Details
Rentals/Services
Practice/Instruction
Policies
Reviews
Reviewer Photos
-
Photo submitted by Zrichey42 on 04/20/2025
-
Photo submitted by CarlosEsquivelB on 10/06/2024
-
Photo submitted by GKing77098 on 03/20/2024
-
Photo submitted by GKing77098 on 03/20/2024
-
Poor fairways Photo submitted by u314159805085 on 01/20/2024
-
Photo submitted by tyl3r on 11/02/2023
-
Photo submitted by Brice1428038 on 04/05/2023
-
Photo submitted by kharlicker on 02/28/2023
-
Photo submitted by u000008176810 on 03/24/2022
-
Photo submitted by u000008176810 on 03/24/2022
-
Photo submitted by u000008176810 on 03/24/2022
-
Photo submitted by robertdale on 01/11/2022
-
#2 Pine Photo submitted by mriemer01 on 12/15/2021
-
Photo submitted by mriemer01 on 12/15/2021
-
Photo submitted by Rttrasamar on 12/28/2019
-
Typical Fairway Photo submitted by bobesson629 on 02/03/2016
-
Photo submitted by marcouxl on 04/16/2014
-
Photo submitted by u000006818327 on 03/18/2014
-
Photo submitted by u000006818327 on 03/18/2014
Mediocre
Course was in rough shape. Greens were slow and bumpy, bunkers were hard packed and had standing water in them, big mud patches in the middle of the fairways, and were told by the starter right before our round that we were playing the front 9 of the palm course, and the back 9 of the pine course. None of this was mentioned upon booking or by the pro shop. Staff seemed annoyed that we were there. We paid $200 for two of us. With it being 115 degrees and the rough shape of the course, definitely not worth $100 a pop. I’m sure the course is great during prime conditions, but absolutely not worth playing over summer.
Course in disarray
First no once of course having 9 holes on each side being shutdown. Major renovations with Jo notifications. Single who had to team up with two other singles and then fibaklynoass 4 frat bros playing in front who refused to acknowledge anyone elesnobbcourse and no granger to handle issue. Total course in bad condition whuu out would never ecommend this okace for the next two years as this will be going on for a long while. Off my list for a long time.
Course Maintenance
It would have been good to know we were playing on a modified setup. We played the back of Pine and front of Palm. Bunkers and greens were trash.
Under Construction
Unaware of construction all over the course. The back 9 of the Palm course is closed. The back 9 of Pine is not in good shape. Played before this time of year and was in much better condition.
Great food
McCormick Ranch is a great golf course. The staff is friendly and the food is amazing.
course review
bunkers were filled with water. many dry and wet areas in fairway.
cart gal could have been friendlier
Massive renovation project on the front 9s of each of the two courses. Forced to play the back 9 of both so it was cool to see two different courses. However, there was no warning and it was a surprise to learn this while checking in for a pre- paid round.
Bit rough, traps like concrete.
I can allow for construction and maintenance, but the course we played had greens that were burned or barren and the traps were absolutely pathetic. Could have troweled a slab in most, like concrete. Didn’t have to rake, couldn’t even leave a footprint. Gravel, not sand. Break your club if you try hit. One of my favorite courses, but full price for a course needing work was a bit unreasonable. Jd2u
Course in really poor shape
Paid $149 (reasonable rate for a nicer course in Scottsdale this time of year) to play the Pine course. When we got there I was informed by the bag attendant that half of one of the courses was shut down for renovations so we were going to sent to play the back 9 of both the palm and the pine course. When I told him we didn't want to do that, he said I should have called the clubhouse when setting up the tee time to let them know I wouldn't want to split the round between the two courses. Why would a customer assume that they are supposed to call to clarify that they want to play the course that they paid to play?
The course was in rough shape, the majority (more than half) of the bunkers on both courses had standing water and the greens on the pine course were pretty torched. Far more mud than you would typically see on a solid Scottsdale course.
The layout was cool and I'm sure when it's in good shape it's a fun course, but feels like an absolute rip off at this price point. Incredibly disappointed with the course and the experience.
Overpriced with snobby pro shop
Don't waste your money unless you're a brand new golfer and your only objective is to not lose a ball...like playing in a field.
Bunkers and greens are not good
Bunkers had lots of standing water (so did course so sprinklers are not synched very well) and no sand just mud. We played Pine and greens on front slower than molasses and back started with them quicker but last three holes were slow even downhill
Not up to scratch
The course conditions were horrible. The sand traps were completely full of water. We have taken the golf course our future list of golf courses to play.
Mudball Ranch
They're over-watering the course, trying to shock the turf back to life. As a result, balls picked up mud in fairways every time. Bunkers were filled with water! Great land, shabby course. Needs to be totally refurbished.
low cost golf
Low cost for Scottsdale but still high for most people. Worth a visit but not exceptional.