Royal Liverpool is returning to the British Open rota in 2006. After playing a tournament there last week I came away quite impressed with the course and can't wait to see how it plays in '06, especially if the course plays firm, fast, and windy.
The course was actually quite green as the area has received quite a bit of rain over the last month or so. Still it is a true links, and all it took was a half day of sun and wind to dry it out and get it running.
Visually, the course fails to inspire at first glance as the holes near the clubhouse lie on flat terrain, the remains of the old racetrack there. Holes 7-13 run among small dunes near the shore and give the course a different (and better) look.
The history of the course and club is rich. 2 of the 3 amateurs to win a British Open were members there (John Ball and Harold Hilton--Bobby Jones was the 3rd), the first international match between England and the U.S. was there, etc. The clubhouse is a mini-museum, with artifacts and portraits from through the years.
What I liked:
1. The bunkering--the fairway bunkering reminded me a little of Muirfield, where the player has to challenge them, because laying back short of them will leave uncomfortably long approaches. On flat terrain, good bunkering can still make for an excellent hole.
2. The greens--although greens like #1 and #5 are dead-flat, the greens as a set are interesting and varied, and also larger than average for a links course. The new greens at #3, #17 and #18 are all very interesting, with all sorts of good pin positions and contours.
3. The stretch from #9-12--a short par 4 to a punchbowl green, a long par 3 to a green set against a large dune, and two long dogleg-left par 4's to greens set up in the dunes with steep dropoffs to the right. They all go in the same direction, and the 10th and 12th may be too similar for some, but it is an inspiring stretch of holes nonetheless.
4. The par 3's--the 4th and 11th greens have great duneside greens; the 13th is a good short well-bunkered par 3, and the 7th is a very small target and reportedly much improved from the old 7th, which was hard against an OB cop.
5. The 18th hole--I think it might be the best finishing hole in the rota; the bunkering is that good. The only weaknesses it might have are (i) it is not overly long at 435 yards, and (ii) with the very tough back-left pins, a player could decide to hit it way right in the rough, take the chances with the lie, and get an angle into the pin. With the grandstands they put in, this may not be an option after all.
What I didn't like:
1. Almost all of the longest par 4's (10, 12, 15, 17) ran in the same direction, so that they either all played short downwind, or all played very long into the wind.
2. The 7th green--of all of the greens that were redone, this was the only one with a "modern" look, with neat clean dropoffs left and right that look like what you would find on a more modern green.
What I wasn't sure about:
1. The "cops" which served as OB on holes 1 and 18; they are certainly unique, and really make those 2 holes what they are, but I'm not sure I like the idea of internal OB. It is amazing what the OB hard against the green on #1 does for that approach; it takes a dead-flat, bunkerless hole and gives it very sharp teeth.
2. The semi-blind tee shot at the 6th. A pulled shot must carry 230 yards to get to the fairway, and the hole was a little awkward. Then again, I bogeyed it all 3 rounds, so I probably can't be objective about it!
Favorite holes: the par-3 4th and 11th, the long par-4 5th, the 9th with a perfectly located fairway ridge, the aforementioned 10th and 12th, and the 17th and 18th, where the bunkering makes each hole.
Least favorite holes: the 1st (I was more than a little worried about the greenside OB), the semi-blind-OB 6th, the 16th (the other OB cop hole). I still enjoyed these holes, just not nearly as much as the others.
For those who have played it, how will Royal Liverpool do as an Open venue? How does it stack up against the others in the rota, and does it deserve its place there? Or is it just a place to study great history instead of great architecture?