The Wolf Creek golf resort near Ponoka, Alberta (not to be confused with Wolf Creek in Mesquite, Nevada), put Canadian architect Rod Whitman on the map. The Old Course, his first solo design, has hovered around the #20 position in the top 100 since opening in the 1980s. It was praised for being "an authentic links course on the prairies", and unlike any course in western Canada.
In the time since, the public opinion of the Old Course has soured. While the course has held steady in the rankings, many believe it isn't worthy of any place on the top 100 list.
Worth quickly noting: until a few years ago, Wolf Creek consisted of three 9s, two of which combined to make the highly rated course, the third often being used separately (starting and finishing a short drive away from the original clubhouse/driving range/1st/10th tee.. perhaps half a kilometer). Whitman returned to create another 9, thus completing a second course, now known as the Links Course. A full practice facility (much better than that at the Old Course) was also completed to compliment the new Links Course. Now the back 9 of the Links, the newest 9 is, in my opinion, the best of the four at Wolf Creek. I personally prefer the Links course, and included it in my "Notable Mention" column on the bottom left. I'm not sure why it is left out of the rankings while the Old Course remains firmly positioned... perhaps it is only the Old Course's claim-to-fame as "Whitman's first!". Regardless, if you go out of your way to play the Old Course, I recommend playing the Links as well.
Having played many rounds at the Wolf (most of which were in competition), I developed a distaste for the course. It wasn't until my last round on the Old Course (not in competition) that I tried to step back and assess the layout without stressing too much over my score. My conclusion: yes, the Old Course is overrated. Its not what it may have once been. However, I do believe many golfers overlook much of the merit in its design. It is still one of the better courses in Alberta, perhaps worthy of a rank in the 70-90 range. Here's why...
 |
| The uphill par 4 2nd |
The round gets off to a nice start, with a gentle par 4 that can be played long iron/wedge. Nothing splashy. On the 2nd tee you can start to see where the Wolf gets its character. The forced carry to the fairway leaves an uphill approach to a tiered green, guarded by a deep pot bunker.
Hole 3 is a gentle par 3 which guides you to (one of) the signature hole(s), "Hawk's Alley". The challenging short par 4 drops back into a heavily wooded area. A creek guards the entire right side, and feeds into a pond that wraps around the entire back and left of the green. I think its a fantastic hole, but the tree growth has created some turf issues on the tee boxes, as the grass probably receives little sunlight. The rest of the hole was in better shape (patchy areas visible on fairway are moisture from fresh rainfall). Perhaps thinning some of the trees would improve the condition of this great hole.
 |
| The demanding short 4th hole |
Like at the 2nd, a forced carry off of the 5th tee brings you out of the trees to an open, prairie-like terrain. The second shot on the 5th is the most links-like on the front 9, with deep bunkers guarding a partially-blind green. While the Wolf was originally heralded as "an authentic links on the prairies", there isn't much of a links-y feel until you hit your second shot to #5. Holes 6-8 are what I would consider pseudo-links. A good par 5, 3 then 4, that don't play like links holes, but are dressed up as such.
The 9th is all about positioning off the tee. The fairway is easy to hit, but the approach is daunting if you're out of place. A deep depression runs infront of the green, and must be carried while threading the needle between a small opening in the trees. Hole 10 is a mid-length par 3, whose main defense is a well-contoured green and false front.
#11, "Buffalo Jump", is the only par 5 on the back. In my opinion, the 11th is the best hole on the course. The hole has 3 distinct tiers: the landing area from tee is the highest, the layup area is the lowest, and the green is in the middle. As you can see, a creek weaves around the layup area and protects the front of the green.
 |
| The reachable 11th... lay up or go for it? |
This creates interesting options. If you hit a good drive, you'll have a downhill opportunity to reach in 2 (its a short par 5). Tempting, isn't it? If you are out of position, or choose not to attack, you must lay up to the lowest part of the hole, which is surrounded by danger.. laying up is not necessarily a guaranteed par (I've seen many golfers "play safe" and end up with double bogeys). If you lay up in position, the uphill approach is relatively easy. On top of being a great strategic hole, I just think its one of the prettier holes on the course.
12 is a difficult driving hole with a straight-forward approach, one of the weaker holes in my opinion. 13 is a great short par 4 that makes a sharp turn to the left. If you lay too far back in the fairway your view of the green will be obstructed, but an aggressive tee shot brings into play trees on the left, and dunes through the fairway. A good drive leaves a simple approach. Its not a signature hole, but a very good one.
The 14th is, in my opinion, the first of 2 holes on the course that look and play like true links holes. It is the most exposed hole since the pseudo-links 8th hole. An open tee shot leaves an approach to a well-contoured green fronted by a devilishly deep pot bunker; its possibly the toughest bunker on the course.
I would consider #15 to be another pseudo-links hole; it has a links-y look but doesn't welcome the ground game (a plateaued green area). 16 heads back into the trees. I have awful history on the 16th (2 lost balls off the tee, forcing me to hit 5 from the tee on the 3rd last hole to take me out of contention at the provincial tour championship), so it pains me to admit that 16 is a really good hole. Its a very short par 4 that would be drive-able if not for a sharp left turn right before the green which is guarded by trees. The green is not visible from the tee. It would be an easy long iron-wedge hole if not for one obstacle: a tree right in the middle of the fairway.
 |
| Approach to 16, as seen from a very conservative tee shot (right side of fairway) |
If you get too conservative, the tree comes into play. Its more safe to play a 200-250 yard shot past the tree and to the left, but is it difficult to see where you are aiming from the tee. The green is the easiest part of this hole, and lets you relax for a moment if you are able to successfully navigate the hole tee to green.
I would call the par 3 17th to be another pseudo-links hole, although it is a much better imitation than other holes (namely 8 and 15). It takes you out of the trees, back to the exposed middle area of the course. The mid-iron 1-shotter has a well-shaped, 2-tier green. Not the best hole on the course, but not the worst either.
The closing hole is the most authentic links hole on the course. It is really not a difficult hole, as long as you can avoid the deep bunker left of the fairway, or the 5 surrounding the green. The hole sets up well for both an aerial or ground attack... although a strong wind often influences that decision!
 |
| The closing approach on the Old course |
Having played the Old course many times, from both a competitive stand-point and a golf course critic's perspective, I've come to 2 conclusions:
1: There's no way Wolf Creek is a top 20 course in Canada. This doesn't do justice to courses in the 10-30 range which are actually elite courses.
2: The Old course is much better than many people claim. Being overrated at #17 by no means makes it a bad course. It is a really good, well-designed layout. The routing is very exciting and diverse, taking you from tree-lined areas to exposed areas numerous times. Many of the holes demand course management and strategy. You have to give thought to your plan of attack on these holes.
All in all, there are (give or take) 6 great holes, 6 good holes, and 6 very average holes. There are no really bad holes. This recipe makes for a course somewhere in the 70-90 range. It is a top 100 course, just not a #17 course. If the course was more appropriately ranked it would stop getting such negative reviews.
Get out and play it, see what you think! Expect a 70-90 course and you won't be disappointed.. and don't forget to play the Links course at Wolf too, its just as good! I'll include a write up on it as well, as soon as I'm caught up on the ranked courses. Both courses provide good bang-for-your-buck, they'll make for a nice 36 hole day!
'Til next time, keep your stick on the ice!
The Golfing Canuck
