Blackledge Country Club - Gilead Highlands

This course drains very poorly and was very soggy after the previous day's rain. There are numerous carries over swampy waste areas in the middle of the fairways--ugly and annoying. The bunkers were mud pits. They could have been easily raked out before play. The ranger was worthless and the round took nearly six hours. I do not plan to return to this facility.

FRONT NINE: The Gilead Highlands Course is enjoyable to look at, but no less fun to play. Built in 2000, the front side offered something different from the back. This outward half is not about narrow, twisting fairways, huge cross hazards, or abrupt elevation changes. Instead, it sports a bit more room for error off the tees, along with extra subtlety around the greens. This layout is balanced without being predictable; the use of hazards is strategic; the terrain includes hummocks and little knolls, swales and falloffs, and plateaued or raised greens—all of which add character. Some of this ground was certainly bulldozed to create interesting effects, yet the fairways flow gracefully up and down the larger hills and vales. Even the bunkering, which emphasizes deepness and larger-scaled traps, looks natural. These hazards, employed strategically, urge you to navigate your way around the course by making intelligent choices. And so this nine counterbalances the back, favoring greater playability rather than a more target-oriented form of golf: there are no 25-yard-wide fairways to hit or big ponds to cross.

Though it favors simplicity, the front never succumbs to dullness, largely because designer Mark Mungeam relied on a few tricks up his sleeve to create further interest. Included among these are trees that intrude upon fairways (sometimes they actually occupy them), greens with complex, hard-to-read slopes, and bunkers that front greens by some distance, say, 20 to 30 yards. From a distance in the fairways, they appear as bordering traps. Such optical illusions were popular with Donald Ross and other Scottish classicists. The greens themselves are well-sited, well-protected and well-varied in both contouring and direction of slope. Mungeam favors open approaches from the front of these greens, letting you decide, oftentimes, whether to pitch or run the ball onto the surfaces.

Mark Mungeam is one of the mainstays of New England golf architecture. Nationally, he’s not on a plane with Tom Doak or Jack Nicklaus, and perhaps he’s a bit underrated. Still, he did refurbish Olympia Fields, site of the 2003 U. S. Open and the 2020 BMW Championship. At Blackledge, Mungeam was one of the Gilead backside designers—along with Geoffrey Cornish and Brian Silva. His other Connecticut gems include Oxford Greens and Connecticut National. The quality of each of these three courses is undeniable.

Other notes, comments & opinions:
A) Kevin Higgins, Director of Golf, was personable, friendly and welcoming—as always.
B) Pace of play was, overall, a bit above average.
C) Wet conditions, though course drains well. Greens have undergone aeration, though in recovery stage. Rest of course in average condition (rough) to good (fairways).
D) Check-in today was done across street at Anderson’s Glen; parking in that lot.
E) Even on a cloudy late-November day, it’s one of the more beautiful courses across Connecticut.

I've played Blackledge weekly throughout May-September & was very surprised to find the front 9 in poor condition today. Course had not removed leaves it quite some time, making it difficult to find balls hit in fairways & rough on many holes. My foursome lost 5 balls hit in fairway on front 9, very frustrating. Bunkers had also not been maintained in some time, greens had not been cut today. Back 9 was in better condition.

If you are a weekend golfer and tee off AFTER 630 am, be prepared for a 5 hour round. We feed off at 12:50 pm and did not finish 18 until 5:32.. to be exact.

Beautiful course in beautiful condition.

Took over 5 hours and 15 minutes nightmare no ranger to keep pace of play reasonably not happy they overbooked course like that unprofessional

Good course, rewarded for hitting straight. A couple of challenging par 5’s. Pace of play was nice 4 hr round.

Greens are superb
Not long but challenging holes
Need to be accurate off the tees.
Need to leave driver in the bag on some short par fours.
Greens are very firm and roll well. High iron shots with backspin stick and stay on the green.
A wonderful course

For a public course, it doesn’t get any better imo. We live almost an hour and a half away and we came back a week later after playing here for the first time. We are from southern R.I. and are surrounded by some great courses but didn’t bat an eye at the thought of coming back to Gilead Highlands for another round, especially after gaining some much needed knowledge on a few of the more difficult holes. The course conditions are as good as any and better than most atm. The layout is amazing with each hole secluded and original. Those two things are most important to me so this course is now easily up there with my personal favorites.

Gilead Highland’s front nine, which impresses most for its variety and playability for all golfers, should satisfy altogether. It has beauty, it’s not overburdened with hazards—they are used shrewdly—and there are plentiful tee-to-green challenges, often demanding finesse and strategic thinking.

Both Blackledge courses simply inspire me to play solid golf. This layout (GH) doesn’t quite measure up to Mark Mungeam’s best Connecticut course, Oxford Greens, but it’s still stellar. Mungeam shows on every hole that he is no common designer. Although the front is endowed with two incredible short par-4's in four and nine that bring the course to life, the greatest energy comes from the two five-pars..

One of these, the adventurous seventh, makes allowances for both good and average golfers, who may play this hole with quite different routes to the hole. Why? Its design features a landing strip of 100 yards prior to the green, a strip that follows a forced carry over the marsh on one's second shot. Ten varying ways routes all lead to pars on this exceptional hole.

But the standout par-five—hole three—comes on like a tougher alter ego to the seventh, especially because of clever angular movement over this hole’s second half. The third fairway is comfortably wide but fully wood-lined. Ideally, the drive's line is to its left side, leaving a far better angle for an attacking second shot, not a defensive one. The reason? You've simply steered wide of the mature, gargantuan tree inhabiting the fairway's right side. What’s especially interesting here is that you now need much less shot curvature when approaching from the left side, assuming you’re bold enough to go for it in two.

Even if the choice on the second shot is to lay-up from that left side, the angle into the green is far better for a wedge on the third, because a substantial opening allows us to take dead aim on most pin positions (or come in more easily) without fear of coming up short. Approach this green from the right, however, and a yawning bunker must be carried to stop the ball on a fast green. Better have a ball that bites—viciously. Only the actual playing of this third hole allows us to see why it's a premier 5-par with a decidedly strategic bent. It's the kind of challenge that makes golf the great game it is.

Other Notes, Facts & Opinions:
1) Conditioning: Greens, very good (fast and rolled smoothly); turf around greens, good; fairways, above average; tees, average. Course seems to have endured heavy play lately.
2) Pace: Somewhat lethargic; in 2020, slowest nine I’ve yet to play in 9 outings: lots of waiting.
3) Front Desk: Leon was outstanding: conversational, personable, knowledgeable about coronavirus issues. They have the right attitude, awareness, and setup here for pandemic. (A+)
4) Amenities: Considerably better over at sister course, Anderson’s Glen.
5) Blackledge should be on your bucket list as a top Connecticut venue. Anderson's Glen received recognition in the national golf media with the 1992 publication of Pedroli and Teagarden's "The American Golfer's Guide" (foreword by Curtis Strange). Here, only two Connecticut courses (out of 500 nationwide) were featured; they were Lyman Orchards and Blackledge/Anderson's Glen.

At 1:30, there weren’t any carts. As I finished the front 9, I wished I got a cart. The back 9 is not a course you want to walk without a bag cart. Beverage cart wasn’t out at all in back 9. Wished I brought more water. The back 9 is less forgiving if your don’t hit it straight. It’s weird how you have a ways to walk back to car if you parked by the club house across the street from main club house. I enjoyed it and would play again but not on the weekend when there’s a shortage of carts. Back 9 is a little challenging. Fun course, though.

Blackledge: Gilead (5.7)
Conditions: 6.5
Greens were slow and a bit bouncy. Greens were receptive and fairways did not roll. Looks in great shape from afar, but details were not very clean.

Layout: 4
Some confusing course layout. Next holes are not very obvious and no signage to speak of. Would have struggled without players who have previously been there.

Design: 7
Really enjoyed some hole designs. Spectacular Par5 on the back with some good par 3s. Most par 3s required the same club 7/8 iron. Good variation of par 4s, but none that stand out as exceptional.

Amenities: 3.5
Strange out of the way parking lot for this course. Clubs house is literally a White House. No range, practice green was okay.

Feel: 7.5
Felt great here. Felt like golf. Possibly because I played well. But holes are secluded and wooded. Tight holes but not unreasonable. Some target golf on the back. Would certainly play again.

Overall: 5.7

we have played Blackledge many times and we have always played Anderson's Glen but this time we decided to play Gilead highlands. Wow this is a much better course . The Tuesday Worcester traveling group will be back all 16 of us had a great time and loved everything about it

Went as a foursome and after first hole we let a twosome play through. We noticed behind are foursome was 3 groups of twosomes and a single. Then ranger who had no personality came up to us and said he was getting complaints that play was slow we needed to pick it up. We played front 9 in 2 hours. Why wouldn't you pair up twosomes ? Felt rushed rest of the round. Played round in exactly 4 hours. Guess they expect under 4. Won't go back

The Gilead front 9 greens were still healing from aeration. But the rest of the course was in good shape. Had to wait 10 minutes while daily maintenance was done on one of the holes. With the fall colors the course was a picture. It was fun to play a New England course in the Fall again. The food in the restaurant was subpar.

Played with a 2pm tee time, nice time of day. Often no one working at the snack shack, cart girls where nice but never saw them on the back 9, could have used another drink... otherwise very nice course

Definitely worth the ride. Fun course, great condition and very nice staff.

The back nine at Gilead Highlands is a strong companion to its outstanding front side. Mungeam, Cornish, and Silva designed what is now this back side several years earlier than the front, and it is mainly a shotmaker’s course: most of the holes lend themselves to working the ball suitably off the tees and into the greens.

The challenge here begins right away, on the first four holes. (Keep things under control on these and your score on this inward half should be respectable.) Three of these four—10, 11, and 12—are typical but hard golf holes in most respects, but the twelfth, a relatively punishing par-five that smites most loosely played shots, will require careful thought if you hope to earn a par. It also features water hazards to be eluded on both first and second shots, and interesting risk-reward choices from tee to green. Most players will tread lightly—and wisely so—here. Hole 13 is a mid-length par-three that certainly appears intimidating from the tee. Yet it does offer a bail-out zone, short of the green, if its tree and pond-edged sides are causing you dread. Given their contouring and their speed (mainly, if putting downhill), the greens will also present challenges on these four holes. But it is capable ball-striking that should most likely determine your overall score on this quartet.

What is required from here back the clubhouse is patience; that, along with cautiously played shots may reward you with a birdie opportunity or two. The overall routing here is a bit unusual: having completed holes 10-13 (a string of holes comprised only of 3 and 5-pars), we are now left with five straight par-fours—all under 400 yards. But these are what shine on this back side. Fourteen and fifteen are great driving tests, requiring accurate placement to avoid hazards and to take the ideal angle of approach for second shots that will fly uphill into these two greens. And neither approach shot is without prickly hazards around the green. They are stunning back-to-back holes. Sixteen is a tree-lined and tough driving hole that demands a tee shot struck accurately enough—usually with a hybrid or mid-iron—to hit a fairway 22 yards wide. This hole’s circular, pitched green penalizes errant-right approaches with a precipitous fall-off. From the tee at seventeen, you may find yourself either loving or hating the landing zone—ultra-tight and curving as it is—but what follows is a beautifully challenging uphill approach to a perched green, guarded as well by a bunker on its right flank. This green may best accept drawn shots that (possibly) run onto its surface. The ninth is a good hole, though it may seem anti-climactic after what have been eight holes requiring precision ball control; it is a short, straightforward, drive-and-pitch affair.

This Gilead-Highlands back side may fall short of greatness, but it is balanced, it is dangerous enough in places, and it will still challenge most anyone who is not a touring pro. On some holes, strong demands are placed on driving and approach shots. Both fairway and greenside bunkers are numerous enough and strategically placed to prevent golfers from going on the attack during every hole or shot. The thick woods on the periphery of many holes will give us even greater pause, along with the threatening water hazards on holes 12 and 13. Still, with careful course management, every hole here is both playable and beatable. Overall, this nine, even though harder, does not quite match the front at Gilead-Highlands, mainly because the outward half is so consistently strong on strategic elements—especially incorporated into both of its par-5’s. Above all, the more natural, pared-down, minimalist style that Mark Mungeam embraced on the later-designed front side (without a lot of earth-moving) virtually proves that ‘less is more.’ Some of the elaborate mounding on this side (for example, between 10 and 18) seems about as natural as high fructose corn syrup.

Putting on these greens will also not cause too much anguish for most players, because they are of moderate difficulty; it is mainly the tenth green (having the steepest pitch) that can spell deep trouble if you’re above the hole. Aesthetically, this nine takes up where the front left off: it’s a stunner. Underscoring its appearance are mature trees, gorgeous ponds, rolling fairways, and often sprawling or variously-shaped bunkers, each filled with white sand. On every hole something delights the eye. Conditioning is quite good here, though the greens were a bit of a disappointment because they ran a bit slower than they once did, if memory serves. Having played GH frequently back in 2002-3, when I was a men’s club member, I can remember feeling that the other three Blackledge nines outshined this one, three or four of these holes here seem like virtual ‘target golf.’ Today, that sense was reinforced, but still I found myself liking this back side better than in olden days. It’s a good, vigorous, and intelligently-conceived set of golf challenges. All of which seems quite enough for the end result: a fine day on the course.