The Homestead--Cascades Course

In my recent ranking of the top 40 courses that I’ve reviewed, I commented several times on how courses had experienced a reversal of fortune on the various golf magazine top courses lists over the 25+ years since I’ve started looking at them. In most cases—like with several of the London heathland courses—these reversals had been in their favor. But for a few other courses, the lists have become less kind. That’s to be expected—fashions change and the bandwagon latches onto the newest thing, discarding older things, albeit sometimes with less than a full reassessment.

But of all of America’s highly regarded public courses, I’m not sure that there’s one that has fallen as far as William Flynn’s Cascades Course at the Homestead Resort in western Virginia. When I first started following the lists, this was commonly considered one of America’s 5 greatest public courses, easily one of its top 100 overall, and was a regular feature on Golf Magazine’s top 100 courses in the world. Over the last 20 years however, it has fallen off all the US and world top 100 lists. And more than its fall in the rankings (although probably not unrelated), it’s just a place that I don’t hear about anymore. Pebble Beach and Pinehurst, the other two high end golf destinations in the late 1990s, remain at or near the top of the list but the Homestead has fallen from being perhaps no. 3 among America’s golf destinations to being…well, I have no idea. I don’t get the sense that it’s considered to be a major golf destination anymore.

So for me, seeing the Cascades was a real curiosity. It’s a course I really wanted to see 25 years ago, but it just never happened then and I—apparently along with everyone else—kind of lost interest in the intervening years with all the new exciting courses. I wasn’t sure whether the course was (1) overrated in the past—perhaps out of deference to Sam Snead, who was the pro here for many years—or (2) whether it had been unfairly disregarded, replaced by the latest hot thing. Or perhaps (3) we just lacked great public courses 25 years ago and as we got great new, more dramatic options like Bandon Dunes and Arcadia Bluffs, the spotlight understandably shifted away from this more modest, mountain valley course toward them.

I’d say that (3) is probably the best explanation. This is not a course that’s made for the modern social media spotlight. The surroundings are gorgeous, but the design features—the bunkers, the green contours—do not jump out. If fact, quite the opposite—Flynn’s design appears always to be trying to keep a low profile, even when a lot of work was done. There’s a lot of sense in his modest approach to bunkering and greens contouring. Flynn lets the features of the land—numerous hills and creeks—provide the main challenge. Where the terrain is more modest in the middle of the back nine, we start to get more bunkering. Flynn certainly wasn’t shy about moving dirt (witness the 4th or the 8th greens) but he did it out of necessity when he faced challenging terrain and did his best to conceal his work.

So all-in-all, I don’t think the downward reassessments of the Cascades have been unfair. Indeed I was surprised when I looked at the Golf Magazine, Golf Digest, and Golfweek top 100 public course lists that the Cascades was in the top 50 of each (35, 42, and 38 respectively). I was under the impression that it had fallen quite a bit further on at least some of them. I suspect that these rankings aren’t too far off. Still, the Cascades is very different from the public courses that get all the attention today and it’d be good if more golf architecture enthusiasts visited and contemplated the Cascades to experience a different type of great golf course.


The first hole shows however that modest doesn’t necessarily mean easy. This is a simple looking hole. But from the ~430 yard tips, it’s one of the harder opening holes that I’ve played. The fairway is less than 30 yards wide but on the right side, there’s a bunker at ~250 and two large Black Walnut trees about ~280 out. So it’s effectively even narrower. The green is deep but only about 40 feet wide for its entire length and guarded by two bunkers on each side. For me, it looked like the opening hole of a course that was trying to host the US Open!

Not the most breathtaking opening drive but it is a difficult one.

Anything that misses the fairway right will have to contend with two overhanging Black Walnut trees.

The green is very narrow and difficult to hit.

While the first hole is more hard than interesting, the long par 4 second is both. It’s the first of three holes on the hilly property across US 220 (the ‘Sam Snead Highway’) and it uses the left-to-right sloping ground beautifully. It’s only about 200 yards to get past the fairway bunker on the right but it’s probably best to aim up the left side of the fairway, which allows you to play up the open entrance at the front-left of the green. The entrance to all but the left side of the green is blocked if you’re up the right. At the same time, you have a flatter lie and probably a better view of the green.

So there are tradeoffs in the different strategies for playing this hole. In any case, I found it to be one of the most beautiful and interesting holes on the course.

The angle into the green is probably better from the left, but you might have tree trouble if you're too far left. And you'll have a flatter lie on the right.

From the right edge of the fairway, all but the front-left of the green is guarded by a bunker.

But there's plenty of safe space at the front-left. This is both an interesting and a very pretty approach.

Three is a funky little par 4 of about 300 yards but, according to Google Earth, it plays more than 100 feet uphill from the tee to the back of the green! I knew it was uphill, but I didn’t realize it was that uphill! The hole works quite well. It’s a good example of the old type of short par 4 that wasn’t supposed to be drivable and the drive does a good job of testing your long iron accuracy. Miss right and you’re blocked by trees. Miss left and you’re playing off the side of a hill…and maybe also blocked by trees.

Longer hitters could take a whack at this green but for the rest of us, it's a good layup short par 4. You can leave yourself a pretty long second if you don't hit one solid and accuracy is obviously important.

The approach also demands a solid strike.

But this isn’t a ski hill (that’s back down the road by the hotel) so we can’t keep going up the mountain and the long par 3 4th comes right back down. According to Google Earth, way down…it says it’s about a 130 foot drop from the 215 yard back tees to the middle of the green! I’ve got to be honest, it didn’t feel nearly that far. It didn’t feel like as much of a drop as some of our northern Michigan drop shot par 3s. I did some investigation and there’s only one I’ve played that has more vertical—the 3rd hole on the par 3 course at Treetops, which drops 140 feet over roughly the same distance. That hole feels like way more of a drop than this one. Maybe the drops in Michigan feel greater is that the surrounding hills (mountains) here are much higher and the background makes the drops seem smaller. Or maybe there’s an issue with using Google Earth to judge differences in elevation changes at small scale. I suspect it's the latter.

In any case, Flynn built a wonderful hole. There’s plenty of space short right and the green is built up high enough such that it’s difficult to tell whether the green slopes front-to-back or back-to-front. That’s true of several of the other hillside greens as well and I’ve never played a course where I had a more difficult time reading putts than the Cascades.

However far this hole drops, it's a good long par 3.

Although there’s a tunnel to cross under the Sam Snead, I decided to pay homage to some of the great London Heathland courses by crossing it on foot—it’s certainly nowhere near as challenging a crossing as some of those.

But there’s plenty of challenge in the par 5 fifth. This hole plays almost 600 yards and illustrates well the principle that I mentioned at the beginning: where the terrain is more challenging, the design features tend to be simpler. The only challenges from tee to green here are the hill that blocks your approach if you drive it up the right side of the fairway and the length. Actually it’s quite important to drive it up the left side here because that gives you a partial view of what lies ahead and spares you from having to either club down or loft your fairway wood over a pretty steep hill.

Lots of room here to drive but if you're a longer hitter, you want to be up the left side so that you don't have to club down to clear the hill.

It's a pretty downhill approach to the green, which doesn't have a lot of trouble around it.

Apparently the stream that runs down the right side of the next fairway used to cross in front of this green but was piped underground (to prevent flooding?). You can see it reappear short and left of the green near the Sam Snead. It'd be nice to see it restored because currently the front of the green feels kind of naked and this would make the shot more interesting.

The shortish par 4 sixth is the first of several holes to play alongside a stream. Distance isn’t so important and because the fairway narrows to less than 25 yards past about 260, it’s smart to lay back.

The drive on six demands accuracy and it'd be sensible to club down.

The approach is pleasant, if not exciting. I think if you're up the right side and not long off the tee, you may have a blind shot.

A beautiful view from behind the green.

Seven is probably the least interesting hole on the front nine but it demands good iron play on the approach as the ball will be below your feet and the shot plays about 30 feet uphill. A bunker somewhere in the left-center of the fairway wouldn’t be a bad addition to give you something to think about on your drive.

One hole that certainly doesn’t need any additions or any other kind of changes is the short par 3 eighth. This is one of the finest short par 3s that I’ve seen thanks to its unusual green.

Because the green was built into the side of a mountain sloping from short-left to long-right, naturally the green is built up in the back-right. But the front half of the green is allowed to slope toward the middle while the back-right is built up high enough to also slope slightly toward the middle, creating a subtle bowl effect. What this means is that wherever the pin is located, you should play toward the middle. It’s especially stupid to play at the pin when it’s in the front because of how narrow the green is here and how tight the bunkers are to its edge.

This front pin on eight is a real sucker pin. You should never play for the front of this green.

It's interesting to look back from behind the green--you can see how steeply sloped the front of the green is toward the middle.

The fine golf continues with the long par 4 ninth. This is probably the widest fairway so far and there’s no trouble out there but as on the 5th, there’s a reason—if you don’t hit it at least 265, you’ll get stuck on a hill and have a blind second. I think Flynn wanted to reward the long ball here and wanted to encourage you to swing away.

While it takes a good hit to reach the flat, probably many more can do it today than in Flynn's day. I think the addition of a bunker on the left side near the crest would help enhance the challenge on what has probably become a much easier hole with modern equipment. Miss the fairway right and you'll be blocked by trees.

So that’s good. But what I really loved about this hole was the green site. Flynn built this green right where the land shifts from being softly downhill to being softly uphill. It’s both a perfect natural green site and allows you to take advantage of the slope to run one in if your drive got stuck on the side of the hill. There’s a bunker at the front-left to keep you honest but the right side is open. Like the second, this is a superb long par 4.

The green site is a beauty and accepts a variety of running shots.

Apparently Arnold Palmer thought that the 375 yard par 4 tenth was one of the finest par 4s in the country. I’m not sure why. It’s a pretty uninteresting looking drive, except of the obvious trouble on the right. But what you don’t see is that at about 220 on the right and 240 out on the left, the fairway is interrupted by a steep ridge and drops about 15 feet downhill to a flat, from where you have a short pitch over a creek to a small, well-bunkered green.

I guess in Palmer’s day, it might have been more of a challenge to reach the downslope in the middle of the fairway and there would have been some advantage to skirting the danger up the right side to shorten the distance to the it. But if that was the intention, it doesn’t work for any but the shortest hitters today—I hit a mediocre drive up the middle and made it easily. I think this hole would work better if it were lengthened by about 30 yards or if bunkers were placed up the left to force greater accuracy.

The drive on ten doesn't look like much but you definitely want no part of the far right side.

I think that if you catch the hill on the right side of the fairway, you might get stuck in the rough with the ball below your feet. Maybe if I played this hole a few more times, I'd find that it's a little bit trickier to catch the slope in the right way than I realized. Still, I think some extra length from the back tees would improve it.

There have been some changes to the Cascades over the past 20 years to undo decades of neglect and misguided redesigns (by—you guessed it—Robert Trent Jones Sr.). Probably the most significant changes have been tree removal and I think the most significant tree removal has occurred in this corner of the property around 10, 11, and 12.

Whereas the par 3 eleventh was once hemmed in by trees, now you can see through the green down the twelfth fairway. It’s a beautiful view. And the original Flynn bunkering has been restored on this hole, with a large bunker left of the green having been removed. It’s another fine par 3.

Running along a stream on the left, twelve used to always be on lists of America’s best holes. But I always remember it being listed as a par 4 while the card today has it listed as a par 5 of about 510 yards. I think the additional yardage is probably a good thing (although that 510 yard tee box was in pretty rough shape…) but given the length the kids hit it these days, it should still be called a par 4.

But none of that matters for the merits of the hole, which is one of the finest holes of this length that I’ve seen. Although there’s been significant tree removal on the hill up the right, it’s still a narrow drive because they’ve left a black walnut near the creek on the left. I don’t mind this at all—we’ve recently played a few wide-open longer holes, now it’s time for a more exacting one.

Even though there's clearly been a lot of tree removal on the right, accuracy (preferably with a slight draw) is still required from the twelfth tee.

The approach is at least as exacting. If you’ve hit a poor drive, you may have trouble carrying two bunkers that interrupt the fairway about 75 yards short of the green. But however far you’ve hit, you’ll need to be highly accurate on the approach because the green is about 45 feet wide and bunkered both left and right. There’s plenty of safe space short but it’s important to keep in line with the green if playing short because the narrowness of the green would make pitches from the left side tough.

This hole has everything—it’s a looker, it’s interesting, and it’s very challenging.

The approach to the twelfth green is such an attractive picture.

But you need to be super accurate because there's very little width in the the green.

And actually the par 4 13th—itself about 440 yards—is similar. This hole also doglegs left along the same stream although this time there’s also a bunker on the right—just at the distance where you’d want to drive it. The approach is also over crossing bunkers, although this time it’s a diagonal stretch running from short-right to long-left that will provide significant trouble if you’ve missed the fairway right. The green is open in front and a bit wider than on the previous hole.

I thought this hole was every bit as good as the twelfth. Really, the only thing that might keep them from being on the short list of the best back-to-back holes that I’ve seen is that they’re too similar to each other. Still, they don’t look or feel the same from the tee and this hole plays as more of a dogleg. So maybe they should be on that list!

Thirteen plays as a bit more of a dogleg left than twelve and you can run through the fairway into a bunker if you don't shape it right or hug the creek.

Several bunkers cross on the approach and they can be trouble off a short or inaccurate drive.

But there's plenty of room to run one on and this green is wider than the previous one.

I think that the only list that the long par 4 fourteenth should be on is a list of holes that should be restored. This green was moved back and to the left by Robert Trent Jones Sr. in the early 1960s to try to make the hole tougher. I’d say he succeeded—in addition to being the course’s longest par 4 at 470 yards, it also has the toughest green, with a mound in the middle that repels balls.

Flynn’s green was about 30 yards short and right of this one if it were restored, the hole would still be plenty long enough at ~440 yards, especially given that it plays uphill. Still, the current version is not a bad hole in its own right and fulfills its original goal of being a tough par 4.

There's nothing tricky about this hole. It just requires long, straight shots.

I think Flynn's green was short and right of the bunkers, just right of and past the golf cart. It does seem like it'd be a better green site than the current one.

Also altered by Jones Sr.—to accommodate the new fourteenth green—was the long par 3 fifteenth. I don’t know why needing to move the tee necessitated redesigning the green, but he did that too. The current hole is a good challenge and fair, with plenty of room to run the ball onto the green. But it’s over dull ground and the design features don’t really give it any character.

There's not much interest in the par 3 fifteenth, but it's not a bad hole and it presents a strong challenge.

Really this whole section of the property out behind the clubhouse comprising holes 1, and 14-16 is pretty dull and suffers from being too open, which is inconsistent with the surrounding forested landscape. Furthermore, the trees that it does have—a lot of non-native Norway Spruces—look scraggly and ugly after several decades of growth. I think it’d be good for the club to develop a long-term plan to improve this section of the property aesthetically, especially because it’s what you see when you arrive at the course and it makes a pretty poor first impression. I’d suggest removing all the Spruces and planting locally common trees like Oaks and Lindens, allowing long grass to grow around them as they mature.

​The qualities of the famous par 5 16th make up for some of that, however. First, it’s a great driving hole, with a cluster of bunkers guarding the inside of the dogleg right. At 245-275 yards, they were the perfect carry distance for me although I think they could also use some trees along the stream that runs between this and the next hole to prevent longer hitters from bombing one right of all the bunkers and leaving a short iron in. I thought that there must have been trees here originally that the staff removed but the historical imagery on Google Earth shows that only one or two trees have been removed in the last 25 years. Again, some reforestry here would help.

This is a fine driving hole although today's kids could easily carry all the bunkers and the tree on the right.

What has been removed is a bunker on the left side of the layup zone which would have made the lay up tricky. But—and maybe just because I saw it featured in so many golf books and magazines when I was younger—the approach to the green is an American classic. It’s just a shot over a pond with two backing bunkers. But the pond being near green level makes it distinctive. Apparently this green was added by Jones and Flynn’s green was on this side of the pond. That’s one Flynn feature which I don’t think they should restore.

I think the creek up the right looks a bit naked and could use some trees around it. They'd also block out anyone who tries to cut off the entire right side, which is currently possible.

The approach to the green is a classic.

I think writers used to talk of sixteen and seventeen as great consecutive par 5s. But I didn’t think much of seventeen. Part of the issue—at least for me—is that the drive is unappealing. The cart path on the left is ugly and I think some trees near the stream and some long grass would make it more attractive.

But it’s not without interest. You probably need to hit it 290 up the left side to get a view of the green. Otherwise you’ll either need to layup or hit a pretty good hook all while staring right at the pond right of the green. The hole is only about 515 yards and you can probably reach the green if you hit a long one up the right side. But the further right you are, the more pond you’ll have to carry on the approach.

Really, it’s a pretty good hole from a playing perspective. I just find it a bit visually unappealing and as with the rest of this section of the property, would benefit from some reforestry. I think it also might make the approach a bit more interesting if the green were closer to the pond.

I found this drive on seventeen to be a bit cheap looking. Removing the cart path and adding some vegetation along the creek would help.

The green is reachable but if you don't hit it long enough up the left side, it's a very awkward shot.

It's a nice looking approach but I think the green should be brought closer to the creek so that it comes into play more for third shots.

The eighteenth was always noteworthy because it’s a par 3 and few great course finish on one. It’s neither the world’s most visually appealing par 3 nor is among the more creatively designed, with a fairly standard set of two bunkers, one a the front-left and the other at the front-right.

But this hole is a bit more clever than most of the other similar-looking par 3s that I’ve seen. One, the green is much deeper than it looks. Two, it’s also less severely sloped from back to front than you’d expect. And that means that you should never try to go at a front pin. Because one, it’s very narrow between the bunkers there. And two, if you miss short, your ball will roll all the way back down the hill, being saved from the pond only by a strip of rough. So it’s a good, exacting mid-long iron to finish, but there’s plenty of room to play safe.

The eighteenth has always been noteworthy because few courses of this caliber finish on a par 3.

The Homestead had been off my radar for so long as a golf destination that I didn’t even realize that there used to be three courses here and that Robert Trent Jones Sr.’s Lower Cascades course had been closed…all the way back in 2012! This place has changed ownership several times in the last 25 years, an indication that not all had been going well (naturally, the Lower Cascades was closed when it was owned by a private equity group).

Now the Homestead is part of the Omni group of luxury hotels and I would imagine that its future is, at least for awhile, secure. The current ownership seems to view golf as one among several outdoor activities—also including horse riding, shooting, fly fishing and, in the winter, skiing—rather than as the focal outdoor activity. Naturally with the resort’s history as a mineral hot springs destination, spa and other pampering services are also a core part of its offering. And family activities appear to be high on the list of priorities; I saw several young families and family activities are mentioned prominently on the resort’s website.

Obviously I have little reason to question these as business decisions. And the resort seemed pretty busy…although the hotel is huge, so who knows where they stand relative to their potential capacity. But I’d also say that it’s a loss to the world of golf if this place is no longer focusing on being a golf resort. I didn’t get a chance to play it, but the Old Course looked very good—over a hillier and, to be honest, more interesting looking piece of property even than the Cascades. I didn’t get a chance to see the Lower Cascades property, which is downstream from the wetlands behind the 16th green. But Robert Trent Jones Sr. built it during the height of his career in the early 1960s and I’m sure it was worth seeing given the topographic interest that any course in this area will inevitably have. I’m sure that the property would be a tantalizing prospect for redevelopment by one of today’s top architects. If they built a great course there, I’d imagine that this place could regain its former standing as one of the premier golf resorts.

This doesn’t appear to be the direction that the Homestead is going. And that’s ok. It means that the Cascades is likely to continue in its current status as a hidden gem among America’s top public courses. And that status does, in a way, feel right; the Cascades is much more modest-appearing than any of the attention-grabbing new courses. I think it would underwhelm a lot of the new golf crowd that’s used to big flashy bunkers and crazy greens.

Still, this course is not being neglected. Everything was in tremendous shape (as it should be for what’s usually a $300 green fee…) and there’s been a lot of gradual tree removal and bunker restoration over the past 20 years. I think that a restoration of the creek in front of the fifth green and of Flynn’s fourteenth and fifteenth holes are the next things to do. I also think that they should develop a plan to improve the aesthetics of the middle of the back nine and maybe the occasional fairway bunker to enhance the driving challenge.

But honestly, I really enjoyed the Cascades as-is and would happily return to play it again. Other golf course enthusiasts should consider taking a detour from the usual destinations into the mountains of western Virginia and give it a try.

One more feature here deserves mention: the fantastic Art Deco clubhouse.