Player at Lyman Orchards Golf Club

I used to play this course a lot, but since their rates have skyrocketed the last several years, I’ve avoided it. I only took this tee time as the “discount” offered was very reasonable, about $65 for 18 & a cart. I didn’t read the fine print that I’d have to fork over another $40 when I got there. $105 for 18 and a cart on a Friday afternoon? It’s price gouging, plain & simple. For that kind of money, I expect the course to be in great shape and have amenities to match. To start, there were no starters on duty (or rangers on the course to speed up slow players). Several twosomes went off before and after our threesome, so play was slow. These twosomes should have been paired up. The tee boxes were an absolute disgrace; most of the time you had to hunt around to find a decent patch of grass to tee up. Fairways were in decent shape. The rough had not been mowed in several days, and if you landed in it, you had to just about step on your ball to find it. Where it had been mowed, they left huge clumps of clippings everywhere, making it that much harder to find your ball. I thought I was on a US Open course it was so thick. The greens had recently been aerated and sanded. Normally when a course aerates, you are told beforehand and a small discount is given. Neither of those things happened, so the greens did not roll true at all and were slow as molasses. So the course was nowhere near worth paying $100 for. The entire driving range was closed for a kids camp. That was not disclosed until I had paid, and normally I like to hit a few balls to warm up, it’s what used to make this course worthwhile. But to close the ENTIRE range? There was an outing happening on the Jones course, and I guess the staff was focused on serving them because we never saw a beverage cart once, and the snack shack at the turn was closed. So as far as amenities this place had nothing for my $100. There are too many other courses of equal or better quality where you can play for less. Unfortunately, the Player course is on its way to being a dumpy 18, unless Lyman gets its act together and pay it some attention. My advice is to play somewhere else besides Lyman, they are gouging their customers.

Overbooked our tee time pace is usally slow everyone plays there ball increasing pace and no rangers to be in sight

Comments on Nine Holes:

Today I was paired with three friends (their initials are L., J. and P.; all pictured) who were enjoying their regular, faced-paced but low-pressure game and sometimes a bit of friendly competition. All were long hitters and excellent playing companions!

The greens were aerated, but Lyman does the right thing and notifies players of it on GolfPass. Heavy sanding made the putting haphazard, although some firmly hit putts rolled in.

Other conditions ranged from very good on the fairways, to somewhat burned-out in both greenside and fairway roughs, to often poor on the tees. The Jones Course (often in better shape from my experience) may be similar, but I would speculate from a few quick looks that it was better today–especially on tees.

I like playing here, and I expect the Player Course will bounce back from these conditioning shortcomings within weeks, as the overall trend the past two years has been an upward one.

Tee boxes battered and bruised. Bunkers very inconsistent. Greens slow but true. Fairways impeccable and rough lush and penalizing as it should be.

Rugged, sometimes exhilarating, always challenging, the Player Course at Lyman serves up one of Connecticut’s truest tests of precision in the public golf arena. Numbers seldom lie–the Player’s scratch against par rating is two over; the slope is 134–and on balance, these are numbers about equivalent to those of Pete Dye’s formidable Wintonbury Hills. They fall only slightly below a course like TPC River Highlands. Unsurprisingly, this course plays like it was designed by Gary Player, as it nicely reflects his diverse influences in course architecture around the world. Mr. Player lists courses that include Muirfield, Cypress Point, Pine Valley, and Trump Turnberry among his “Top Ten” venues, all of which have at least one thing in common: each is quite difficult. This nearly begs the question of whether or not this Player Course is overly tough. The answer is partly a matter of one’s perspective. I would assert that this layout is still, despite a few hiccups, a fair test.

Because I haven’t toured this Player’s full 18 holes for many years until today, here’s my summary of the back nine:

10: Par-4, 386 yards:

The first section of a tumbling landing zone is severely (and oddly) pinched, yet the entire green complex–looking like something out of Muirfield in Scotland--is fantastic.

11: Par-3, 219

Maybe the most aesthetic hole on the course. Exhilarating tee shot.

12: par-4, 437

It’s an ambitious hole, but the uphill, blind second shot seems like overkill on this long dogleg, which adds deep rough, sidehill lies, and a narrow green relative to the length of a typical approach shot.

13: par-3, 217

Clever three-par: a big frontal mound can play havoc with a lower approach; the green is subtly contoured.

14: par-5, 493

Drive down the right side for an ideal approach. From the left, the only hope of reaching in two is by a big draw–or possibly a hook–around a pair of tall trees. Brutal rough lines the fairways–and numerous other hazards are tossed in for good measure.

15: par-4, 346

Short but perilous. The drive isn’t too problematic unless you pull or hook it, yet the approach can’t stray far: an elevated green, though not an island, is mostly surrounded by water.

16: par-3, 196

#18 index but a solid test, telling us something about the difficulty of this golf course.

17: par-5; 536

Is this the Player’s best par-5? Playing out like a Cape design, the second shot requires cool, strategic thought: you’ll need to land it on an angled, well-guarded strip of fairway (wetlands left, and a pond long) before pitching the third–most likely–onto the green–which happens to be superb.

18: par-5, 554

The closer, reverting to target golf, plays to an offset and spacious fairway surrounded by trouble. All shots from tee to cup require careful execution.

Course Strengths:

Besides effective hole design, the Player Course’s routing is quite radically varied. The first two holes start out what was once the orchard, while the next five are carved mostly through tall woods. Holes eight and nine, which are more open, merge on what I would call the “highland” section of the course: the ultra-rugged section from ten through thirteen. The par-5 fifteenth, a transitional hole that parallels a road, leads the layout down into flatland over the final four.

Overall, the nature of this landscape generated some fine opportunities that Gary Player exploited well–and he added some twists. The five-par threes are varied and compelling, especially the three steeply downhill gems (7, 11, 14); each offers challenges without pointless frills. The opening par-4 begins the round powerfully: the very hard uphill approach is surprising. Some of the other par-4s, notably five and fifteen, are great target holes that also require some thought to play well. Player mixes it up with several more open holes, but the two best may be the par-5s that finish the round. These should be attacked by contrasting strategies/ ball flights. Unexpectedly, the seventeenth mildly exudes the aura of a links hole.

Another unusual choice in the design is the relatively benign greens: only a few have slopes that may cause concern for three-putting. Perhaps this was meant to counterbalance a layout with no pushovers as tee-to-green holes.

What does concern some golfers who’ve played here (at least, I recall, during a period of a few years after it had opened) is blind shots and forced carries. The blind shots are of limited scope, while the number of forced carries might be cause for concern, as one or more appear on holes three, five, eight, and ten. The latter has intervening, dense rough between tee and fairway. The Player’s forced carries, however, should not typically dismay capable golfers: by comparison to some of the ultra-long fairway carries at Bethpage Black, for instance, they should seem moderate–if not benign. Even still, it’s fair to criticize a hole like the eighth–with its two forced carries when played from the deep tees.

Conditions:

Overall, good (and they have continued to improve from last year). Excellent greens and very good fairways. Tees varied in condition, but most were good. Roughs seemed very long (due to rain?) and dense, which is slowing down play to an extent.

Some Conclusions:

A sense of perspective is key to appreciating how Gary Player designed this course. His choices comprise several of the tougher “Modern” ones: they often reflect the notions of major figures like Trent Jones, Sr., Nicklaus, Pete Dye, or Dick Wilson. This often means target golf, as opposed to the “post-modern” or Minimalist conceptions of architects like Tom Doak, Gil Hanse, Coore & Crenshaw, et al., who have favored holes (among other priorities) that offer more strategic choices for golfers. Perhaps above all, these Minimalists have emphasized the idea of wider playability for a broad range of golfing skill levels. Although I empathize somewhat more with the Minimalists than with the Moderns, I see golf architecture as not a formula but an art, which means that there is latitude for individual expression and imagination in every design. For me, this renders tedious any and all of the ongoing harping about the implied fatal flaws of the Modern Age.

So when assessing any golf course, it seems wise to take the wheat from the chaff. And like any other golf course, the Player is not perfect. Surely, though, it has a lot to offer both avid and serious golfers.

My opinion is the Players course has a totally different look, and it’s gotten easier and faster to play, probably no accident? Basically, big machines took away a lot of the scary stuff and blind shots. You can see what’s ahead even though you still don’t want to be there in some cases. The tee shot on #3 is probably the best example. It was a totally blind shot, 100% ball loser for 15 handicap or higher. Now, it’s a totally playable, fairly easy hole. These guys are truly a money making machine here, and slow play was costly. Yeah, I like it, probably played it at least ten times a year.

The third hole encapsulates Gary Player’s design style on this 1994 layout, a style that generally informs most of the front nine of his Lyman course in Middlefield. The left of the landing area is tree-lined; the right, too, is even more woodsy, but with a buffer zone of large, scattered mounds edging the fairway. The entire front of the landing area is guarded by a massive, moat-like pit filled with brush (creating a forced carry). The hazards dictate what turns out to be the optimum angle to approach the green, which is the fairway’s left side, where there is less interference than on the right; there, impinging tree branches may well block your second shot if your drive was a bit errant. These were not just situational choices dictated by the natural, as-found terrain, it seems, but deliberate ones: they appear again, similarly or with slight variations, on holes five, six and eight. It so happens that these are all among the toughest driving holes among the eighteen.

The Player’s front side also exploits elevation changes to add further challenges. The first hole, for example, rises up from its tee to an offset fairway (where trees on the right side of the landing zone can again become hazardous on the approach). The first green itself is situated on a small hill. Several holes also drop downhill: both five and six feature greens set at the base of hills. The beautiful par-3 seventh starts from a high tee and drops some six or seven “stories” to a nicely contoured green. Conversely, the tee shot at eight must be hit back up the hill to a fairly tight fairway.

The incoming side retains the same basic flavor as the front, but only through hole thirteen. Over the last five, things open up somewhat spatially, but the character is also changed significantly on the closing stretch by the addition of several large water hazards in the form of ponds. These guard both fairways and greens. Gary Player added several fairway bunkers on three of these closing holes, whereas on the front they appear only once. The bottom line is that there are plenty of hazards on both front and back.

Yet the Player, some three hundred yards shorter than the neighboring Jones course, both from the deepest tees as well as the blues, has the same slope rating but also the same essential stroke rating. What accounts for this? It’s not the greens; they, in fact, are less contoured and often flatter in general than those on the Jones. Instead, the Player is simply less forgiving from tee to green, its penalties more severe for missed shots, the proximity of its hazards to its fairways more lethal, often enough. It has some of the character of New Jersey’s Pine Valley (minus the predominant pines, and about three shots easier–scratch vs. par–than that monster), while the Jones Course reminds me of another of Trent Jones’ creations at the famous Hazeltine National in Chaska, Minnesota, if quite a bit less difficult.

This is not to say that the Jones shouldn’t be called a ball-striking test on the order of the Player. The simple difference between the two is that mostly the tolerance for “sprayed” (or even slightly sprayed) shots is far less on this shorter layout, especially at tighter holes like three, five, and eight, but also on more open holes like the downhill par-3 eleventh, where any ball hit a few scant yards over the green is destined for oblivion. The Player mostly fits the mold, then, of target course.

All that said, I enjoy the Player for what it is: a solid and satisfying test of golf throughout. It’s not as strategic as the Jones course because golfers don’t have as many options for choosing a line of play from tee to hole, most notably on the par-5s. Yet in my opinion the course should not be skewered for being overly penal. The fairways are wide enough, the greens are properly proportioned and receptive, the shot values are generally balanced and therefore fair.

Conditions:

Good. Greens are fringes excellent; greenside roughs good but a bit inconsistent; fairways good and fairway roughs playable; bunkers and tees average overall. Some of the tees need work. While it doesn’t match the Jones Course, the greens are noteworthy for their high quality.

Some Conclusions:

In light of conditioning improvements over the past few years, I think this course is definitely worth playing. The Player Course will doubtless challenge those who are serious about golf.

On a fine autumn day this afternoon, I enjoyed playing this challenging track once again. As my previous reviews have detailed, the Player Course puts a premium on good ball-striking. And there are still plenty of trials and tribulations that await you around the greens if you misplay approach shots by too much.

I’ve seen an improvement, overall, in course conditions since playing here last time. The fairways were very good, greens good (they’d been aerated, but some time ago), and greenside areas fine as a rule. Only some of the roughs and some tees were in average condition. Bunkers could also use a little work, but—let’s face it–most courses are not putting the full court press on conditioning in late October.

All in all, a fine day at Lyman. The scenery is a terrific bonus here.

Played the Player course the day after playing the Jones course. Surprised to find Player was 33% cheaper when making tee time, though the reason became clear very quickly.

Player course has sustained damage from the very wet season with rot/disease causing sparse areas on the fringe around most greens and many of the tee boxes. The poor conditions were exacerbated by the lack of maintanence of the forced carry natural areas on the front 9. The fairway could not been seen from the third tee due to overgrown vegetation leaving us to wonder whether the group in front had cleared the fairway, same issue exists on the 5th hole approach shots. Tee shots on the 14th hole were effected by the close proximity of the tee to the vegetation.

The rough was thick & lush though populated with crab grass in several areas, greens were slow & covered with unrepaired pitch marks. All bunkers had not been raked and featured firm compacted sand.

Overall our 4some was left with the distinct impression the Player course does not receive the same TLC as the Jones course. The conditions combined with the peculiar layout of the Player course made for a very unsatisfying experience. Recommend you skip this one...

Nice course. Need to cut some trees on 3 and 5. Can’t really see the fairway or green from the tee. Few cart paths need paving and shrubs trimmed away from path. Rough very thick and hard to find the ball, cart path only and not that wet. Lots of potential

For the beginning of the season the greens and fairways were in great shape. The downfalls are, to much visible garage on the edges of the cart paths from disrespectful people! Plenty of garbage cans on the course. Also the cart paths themselves could use some work. All being said, it was a nice challenging course!

The course was in good condition but soft so they had cart path only rule. Most of their cart paths are a good distance from fairways so play time increases. They heavily overbooked course and ran out of carts. Poor planning!