News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


John_D._Bernhardt

TOC 8,9 and 10
« on: October 28, 2002, 06:34:34 AM »
We have looked at holes such as 1,17,11,12, 13 and others in great detail. I find little discusion on 8,9 and 10. I also find them to be weak holes on an otherwise which the word masterpiece applies. I really do not like 8 at all and find only the back tee to make any sense on a hole which has a blind landing area from the front tees. 9 and 10 are back to back drivable holes depending on the wind and neither has the character of 12 which is also drivable depending on the wind. I have had some very interesting short game shots on 8 and 10. Those greens do have interesting contouring which make the holes merit increase in value to the course. Three(9,10,12) drivable par 4's in a short stretch of holes does merit discusion.  
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

ChipOat

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: TOC 8,9 and 10
« Reply #1 on: October 28, 2002, 06:47:11 AM »
John:

You and I should brace ourselves for the onslaught of hostile reactions that are certain to follow.

I agree that #'s 8-10 at TOC are weak holes.  I'm not sure I remember that the green complex on #8 was all that interesting, either but will defer to you.

One of my biggest surprises this year was that TOC won the first edition of Survivor.

Great golfing experience and many championship holes - too many VERY ordinary ones, though IMO.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

John_D._Bernhardt

Re: TOC 8,9 and 10
« Reply #2 on: October 28, 2002, 06:58:47 AM »
thanks chip for I am not sure what led me to this subject other than a feeling time and time again of how weak they are. Those 3 are a stretch where I grab some birdies. Maybe i have been hanging with media types and got caught up in their manner of finding and creating controversy.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Rich Goodale (Guest)

Re: TOC 8,9 and 10
« Reply #3 on: October 28, 2002, 07:18:40 AM »
John

You are right, of course, but you are going to be in BIG trouble when Tommy N. and Ran wake up!  :o
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

D. Kilfara

Re: TOC 8,9 and 10
« Reply #4 on: October 28, 2002, 07:35:59 AM »
In defending the Old Course, I often like to point out that the course as a whole offers something for everyone, and I do mean everyone: professionals, high handicappers and everyone in between. Too often, in my opinion, the quality of a golf course is analyzed exclusively in terms of the challenges and difficulties it presents for those at the professional end of the scale. The tough holes on the Old Course can be played to a finish by anyone (well, not counting an older/weaker player who lacks the strength/technique to escape some of the deeper bunkers), whereas the easy holes still require some thought and execution from the professional. And the easy holes give the higher handicapper, who almost always is only worried about finding the fairway and not losing golf balls, a chance to actually consider and employ different strategies. Each of 8/9/10 works in this regard:

#8: When the pin is near the gaping front bunker and the wind is blowing from behind - as it often is - there's a very real dilemma: play to the right, go long, or take on the difficult challenge of just clearing the bunker and its downslope to give yourself a birdie chance? With the pin elsewhere on the green, this challenge largely recedes for the pro; the amateur, however, is easily suckered in to thinking that anywhere on the green will do, whereas the green itself is packed with subtle complexity, and two-putting from 40 feet is never a given for anyone.

#9: The challenge for the pro is to make 3. The driving area is wide, and the green relatively flat, but when you're hitting a wood and there's gorse and heather to worry about on both sides, nothing is a given. My favorite pin for the pros is on the left edge of the green, next to the lone bunker and almost on a line with the right edge of the left-sided heather, because that's when it really becomes a great risk/reward hole for anyone. For the amateurs, however, the bunkers in the middle of the 9th/10th fairway make for a very interesting driving decision: do you try to carry the bunkers with a driver? Play out to the right of them, thereby lengthening the hole? Take on the more difficult avenue down the left? Hit an iron off the tee to lay up and leave a longer second? Are any of these decisions made more preferable by the pin position? Very few golfers are so good or so bad as to not have to face these choices; I find it refreshing that strategy caters to exactly the sorts of golfers who have never made a strategic decision in their lives!

#10: Definitely tougher than the preceding two holes for the pro, as the driving area is narrower and the green more difficult (especially when needing to hit a bump-and-run into the green over the difficult contours at its front). Iron off the tee for safety, or try to thread the needle through bunkers right and vegetation left? The same choice is there for the amateur; the big Kruger bunker (I think that's its name, off the top of my head) on the right is within range of a decent poke, to the point that I've hit iron off the tee a number of times just to be absolutely sure of staying short, but in so doing sometimes I mishit the iron and leave myself a 6- or 7-iron into the green, which is always a bummer on such a short hole. Wherever the drive finishes, the second shot requires a good deal of finesse to generate a good birdie chance, because 20-footers on that green are not easy.

If these holes had narrow fairways and flattish, small-to-medium-sized greens, you'd be right - they'd mostly be bland, boring holes we'd have seen a thousand times. But width and contour are two great blessings: the former allows for decision-making, and the latter keeps things interesting. They're not my favorite holes on the course by any stretch, but to call them "weak" misses a fundamental point about golf in St. Andrews - it's supposed to be for everyone.

Cheers,
Darren
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Ran Morrissett

  • Karma: +0/-0
Fine but not great
« Reply #5 on: October 28, 2002, 02:23:23 PM »
8 is a great example of a single bunker (and the slope off the back of the bunker) determining the difficulty of the entire hole. When the flag is near the bunker, and the hole is playing at its proper length (i.e. short as opposed to those horrible new tees), it takes great restraint for an ace golfer to aim away from the flag. The hole looks so simple that many want to force the issue and that's when things start to get interesting. Conversely, many play away from the bunker only to three putt from long range. Either way, the resulting '4' places the golfer in a horrible frame of mind.

I wish Pet Dye could have better explored the concept of a simple looking hole that plays with a golfer's greed - unfortunately, the penalty is so severe for failure on his one shotters that one is rarely tempted to do something that hindsight shows was foolish.

Lastly on the subject of the 8th, Bob Jones once hit a soft cut and the ball faded around the mound behind the bunker to within 10 feet of the hole. His caddie remarked "My, but you're a wonder, sir" and Jones called it "the most sincere compliment I can ever remember". My point is that if Jones had to work that hard and if a caddie can get that worked up on a shot, then the hole's playing merits may well exceed its simple appearance.

As for the 9th, the flatness of the approach adds to the variety of the course as a whole as the only other flat approach is at the 1st and the burn there makes it an altogether different proposition. The virtue and challenge of a dead flat area of green shouldn't be ignored. For instance, the flatness around 9 at NGLA is also appealing as it is unique to that course as well.

10 has to have one of golf's most perplexing greens - tons of players get close in one but tons write down a four. Brother John and I went around and around on that green one Sunday and finally left without having gained any idea as to why the 10th green is so tricky - yet look at how so many of the chip and pitch shots rarely settle within 10 feet.

Bob Jones put down some superb thoughts re: the maddening aspects of these holes but I can't recall which book/article they were in. I will try to find them as they offer his characteristic insight.

I wouldn't call any of the three holes 'great' (12 is tons more interesting than 10 or 9 and 11 kills 8) but I would give 8-9-10 a 7-5-6 on a scale of 1-10. In no way do I think of them as horrible holes.

Cheers,
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Tommy_Naccarato

Re: TOC 8,9 and 10
« Reply #6 on: October 28, 2002, 02:51:29 PM »
John, John, John, John, John.........

You should be ashamed of yourself! I'm going to take this as a simple mistake and confusion over LSU losing to, of all teams...Auburn!

Darren and Ran both have described it perfect. The subtlety and pure unadulterated evil that exists in that putting surface at #8 and 10 (For those of you not knowing the layout, it is a double green. All of the double greens add up to 18.) is awe-inspiring to me, in fact it is one of my favorite greens on the course, but that would be a very close call with the rest of them! (something Tom Marzloff himself wouldn't have the nerve to touch.)

I myself (on #8 ) favor taking it over the right peaking bunker in front, hooking it on to the green and praying like hell I don't three putt, which of course I did on three occasions.

#9? Well there is so much hoopla on it being so easy, and in the past, I have described to many about sitting near the tenth tee, eating those packaged deviled-egg sandwiches they sell over Old Tom Morris's shop, sipping a diet coke and watching many a player nearly drive the green and still walk away with par. It's a green that seemingly breaks towards the North Sea, but sort of tails off from every angle.

Then, the thing that really just gets me the most......

Do you know how many times I have seen people three and four putt the 10th? ? ? ?

Back right of the left side of the green-pin-position,
FAHGETABOUTIT!

John, I want you to go to bed tonight begging forgiveness to the Almightiest of All High. Blasphemy is not tolerated in his kingdom! Nor mine either!

:):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):)





« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:10 PM by -1 »

Doug Siebert

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: TOC 8,9 and 10
« Reply #7 on: October 28, 2002, 04:37:10 PM »
I'll go along with 9 as a weak hole, but I'd have to disagree about 8 and 10.  Having such a short hole with such a large green and the lone bunker seems to lull a lot of people into carelessness.  And when the pin is around that bunker, which I'm sure it usually is, you better think a bit about your shot before just firing away at the pin thinking birdie.

Personally I think the 10th is a brilliant hole, and most especially difficult with a left edge pin position.  Do you aim over at that side, and risk a hook into the gorse, or do you play safe out to the right, and risk leaving a monster putt?  First time I played there, I was driving very poorly, and played safe out to the right and hooked it onto the green, for a lucky two putt birdie.  Second time I boldly went for the extreme left side pin position, and hooked it into the gorse.  I played my 3rd overly safely, and ended up way right and long (within 30 feet of the 8th hole's pin, so I had to wait on the group on the tee to play)  Faced with a 150 foot putt, my caddie recommended I chip it, as most people have trouble hitting the ball hard enough to putt it 150 feet.  I should have taken his advice, but I couldn't think of risking damaging sacred ground by chipping on those greens, and left my effort 30 feet short ending up with an ugly 6.

Now I'll grant that having three driveable par 4s over four holes is undesireable on any course, but that is only looking at it from a modern perspective.  Give everyone here a hickory shafted persimmon driver and Haskell, and I would feel quite safe standing by the pin on those holes while everyone tees off  :-)  Anyway, 9 and 10 do have longer tees for the Open -- 9 is 380 yards long, which I'm sure would make those useless bunkers that are carried with ease from the tees we get to play a bit more thought provoking!
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
My hovercraft is full of eels.

John_D._Bernhardt

Re: TOC 8,9 and 10
« Reply #8 on: October 28, 2002, 07:25:34 PM »
Ok Tommy and Ran I shall take my much desrved beating now. I did sit through the Auburn game in the rain saturday and found little to live for after such an a.. whipping. I was ever so thankful to our pilot for having me back in Lafayette at Ruth Chris Steakhouse drowning my sorrows in Makers Mark on the rocks within an hour and a half of the bitter end. Please note these holes get very little discussion on here. I feel is their relative strength or lack thereof in comparrison to the other 15 does merit discussion. The backward approach to this seemed the best way to put them on the table. I still do not like 8 from the front tee which is where I have played all but one time. The back tee allowed the hole to set up and show the character Ran described. How do i argue with any Bob Jones quotes, being a man I hold in the highest regard period. I would date that witch, who is giving Hootie a reason to extend his constitutional 10 minutes each day, if it would get me on ANGC to breath the same air and hit the shots Jones did. All that said, I still feel it is one of the weaker holes on this most holy of places. I really stand by number 9 as the weakest hole on TOC, given 10 and 12, both of which are better. It is the one place that i would change a hole on the course. Tommy, i know the Gods of Golf should ban me forever from TOC and Fife for having such thoughts, but this is the proper confessional. I had these thoughts on 4 differents trips around the course. Most notably, when realizing how much space is behind the green in the gorse. lol I do feel the green complex on 10 as noted above is interesting and wild to play. Yet it is slightly cheapened by 9 and 12 again. In conclusion, TOC and Fife hold a spot in my heart 2nd to none on earth, with history giving the edge, including the Tiger Stadium and the Monterey Peninsula.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

D. Kilfara

Re: TOC 8,9 and 10
« Reply #9 on: October 28, 2002, 07:42:03 PM »
John - just remember, if you're going to rate the individual holes on golf courses, every course by definition has to have a worst hole, a second-worst hole and a third-worst hole. You've probably identified my own least favorite stretch of the Old Course (#15 would probably come next-from-bottom on my personal list), but I think the holes work very well in their own way regardless. In any event, it's certainly OK to not like a couple of holes and still like the overall course, isn't it? I certainly wouldn't ban you from Fife for your opinions, in any event...

Cheers,
Darren
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

John_D._Bernhardt

Re: TOC 8,9 and 10
« Reply #10 on: October 28, 2002, 07:49:35 PM »
Thank you Darren but Tommy has not dealt out justice yet, lol. I am concerned he may try to bring the guillotine back into use. lol
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Tommy_Naccarato

Re: TOC 8,9 and 10
« Reply #11 on: October 28, 2002, 08:14:12 PM »
Nothing like a little bit of New Orleans Justice, eh John? ? ?:)

Lets see now, you have some pretty tough holes through 1-7, or at least where it is possible to have your hat handed to you for the most sporting of gentlemen, you come up for this short break because you then have one of the more punishing one-shotters in links golf up ahead; along with that SOB of a hole named Hole O' The Cross @ 13; another hole which can for all intensive purposes is guiding light to the world of strategy--the 14th and then four more stragith two-shotters to test ones mental state from 15-18, with one of them being the most famed and respected punishing hole in the game....

Yeah, I think the golfer could use a SLIGHT break at least once during the round.

John, my sentencing is reasonable. Not one but three bamboo shoots shoved between your most valuable finger tips. If you squelch, I'll add a fourth, and so on and so on.

If you can't do the time, don't do the time, as my good friend Robert Blake would say. We all know how credible he is.

« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Mike_Cirba

Re: TOC 8,9 and 10
« Reply #12 on: October 28, 2002, 08:26:24 PM »
Is there a short par four in golf where second shots never seem to get any closer than 15 feet than the 9th?  

I swear it's because the green is so undefined, and so flattish.  There is no target...it's like trying to hit a flagstick sitting in the middle of a field.

Either that, or....the ghost of Old Tom and Bobby just pulling the Shaq move and deflecting approach shots as they come in willy-nilly, laughing and toasting and hoisting another round in that great pub in the sky.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

John_D._Bernhardt

Re: TOC 8,9 and 10
« Reply #13 on: October 29, 2002, 01:14:59 AM »
Tommy I take my punishment with my head high and without complaint. lol and thank you for not lashing out about the desire to change 9. I thought that might put you to Emperer histeria. Or maybe even sentense me to play Rees Jones course for life. lol
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

D. Kilfara

Re: TOC 8,9 and 10
« Reply #14 on: October 29, 2002, 05:10:48 AM »
Mike - agreed about the ninth green. There are spirits out there at the end of the course, warding your ball away from the hole! Or actually, maybe the architectural principle behind the hole has always been far more subtle and psychological than we've ever thought: lack of definition may really be as much an obstacle in our minds as bunkers, contours, rough, etc. And only a course as great as TOC has thus far brought that point to our attention!

Cheers,
Darren
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Tommy_Naccarato

Re: TOC 8,9 and 10
« Reply #15 on: October 29, 2002, 10:08:47 PM »
Darren,
Not that his word might matter to most here, but I will try to include later a verse from Desmond Muirhead's book with Tip Anderson, on the Old Course's 9th.

Desmond really enjoyed talking about the Kruger's and who exactly they were--a blood thirsty couple who actually fought together in the Boar War, and their penchant for terror was quite un-British-like. (Sort of like the McKeaver Brothers who used to play American football for USC and the old Los Angeles Rams back in the 60's. They are legendary in some parts around here. So were the Kruger's! Desmond talks about them a bit in his chapter in the book, and if anyone is interested in buy the book, drop me a line.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

John_D._Bernhardt

Re: TOC 8,9 and 10
« Reply #16 on: October 29, 2002, 11:27:57 PM »
Tommy I got drunk, in a manner which a golfer at TOC should be proud of, with Tip Anderson last september around the corner from TOC and yes he had on a Umbrella shirt. lol Yes it is sad to not remember the name of the bar/hotel on the corner across Auchierlonies the most famous club maker in all of golfdom. lol
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Tommy_Naccarato

Re: TOC 8,9 and 10
« Reply #17 on: October 29, 2002, 11:56:41 PM »
John, I'm sick as a dog right now, and I'm having trouble myself! :P

Lets see now.......Rusacks or Scores?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Tommy_Naccarato

Re: TOC 8,9 and 10
« Reply #18 on: October 30, 2002, 12:03:21 AM »

No. 8

No 9
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

ChipOat

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: TOC 8,9 and 10
« Reply #19 on: October 30, 2002, 05:57:42 AM »
Darren:

It is true that even the greatest of golf courses have to have "worst", "second worst", etc. holes relative to the others on that course.  My problem with TOC is that the weaker holes there are, IMO, not too exciting by "normal" standards, either.  That's a legitimate comment about Pebble, as well although I think there's a lesser number of holes at PB than TOC that deserve that label.  Actually, that's a legitimate comment about all but 2 courses I've ever played.

To me, the truly awesome thing about Pine Valley and Cypress are that the "18th best" hole on both courses would be "top 3" on almost every other course in the world.  Hell, every hole on THE SHORT COURSE at PV would be almost every other course's best par 3, IMO.  To me, PV and Cypress have "least excellent" holes rather than "worst" holes.

Ran and others have made good articulate arguments for the subtle aspects of the holes in question on this thread.  I will need to play them again with their perspectives in mind before reaffirming my indifference towards that stretch of holes - and I hope to do just that next year.

In the meanwhile, the (IMO) ordinary nature of #'s 1, 8-10 and 18 at TOC leads me to conclude that, among other things, the New Course at St. Andrew's is at least as "good" a layout as its more famous neighbor.

That ought to get a few motors running!

« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Doug Siebert

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: TOC 8,9 and 10
« Reply #20 on: October 30, 2002, 02:34:30 PM »
Well, if we take your claim that 5 holes at TOC (that number keeps growing, someone want to single out 4 more to make it 50%?) are weak, and we can't find that many weak holes on TNC, does that make TNC better?  Personally I find the Jubilee more interesting than TNC in a lot of ways (though it does have a couple odd holes that someone detract from it)  TNC relies on heavy rough a lot more than either TOC or Jubilee in creating difficulty, the green complexes as a whole are more interesting on the Jubilee, IMHO.

But anyway, I think it is a bit unfair to judge a course that wasn't really designed with the same criteria one might judge a Kingsbarns, Doonbeg, Sand Hills or whatever.  I think it is up to someone complaining about weak holes on TOC to pony up and show us alternate routing that would improve matters, with no use of earth moving equipment and very minimal bunker changes.  Other than the reverse routing discussed recently, which I'd almost consider flying over for a weekend to try out someday...
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
My hovercraft is full of eels.

ChipOat

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: TOC 8,9 and 10
« Reply #21 on: October 30, 2002, 02:57:27 PM »
Doug Siebert:

I'm not sure "complaining" about weak holes is quite the right verb but "opining" is certainly accurate and, I believe, THE reason for this DG to exist.

As to your suggested protocol that all negative opinions be supported by a proposed enhancement/solution - if I could do that, I'd be in that business!!!

I actually do believe that I have some constructive ideas on many holes that I've played often, but there's only 6 courses in the whole world I've played more than 20 times in my life.  Erego, there's maybe 108 holes on earth where I'm comfortable getting into that kind of detail.

For the other 6000+ different holes I've played, of which I probably remember 100+ pretty well, I'm limited to impressions as to degree of difficulty, strategic interest, venue or just plain old "appeal" as I define it.

To me, TOC has more "ordinary" holes than I like to experience on a consensus All World Top 10 layout.  After I played TOC another 10 times, and had 2-3 discussions with people the likes of which frequent this DG, I'd be able to respond in the manner you've suggested.

Until then, I believe that my somewhat less-informed opinions (both positive and negative) are still about as valid as most other people's on the site.  Perhaps not, but perhaps yes.

BTW, although I've not played Jubilee, I think TNC is the single most overlooked course in the U.K.  Discussions about "hidden gems" always include Brora, Tain, Elie, Crail Swindley Forest, etc.  If TNC wasn't in St. Andrews, it'd be on those same short lists IMO.  I think it's a WONDERFUL course.

Cheers.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Doug Siebert

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: TOC 8,9 and 10
« Reply #22 on: October 30, 2002, 03:46:23 PM »
You are right, "complained" was the wrong word there.  I'm not suggesting that all opinions about shortcomings of courses be supported with an alternative, but TOC is a special case, as it didn't have anyone thinking up the routing, green sites, bunkering, etc.  It is what it is.  The march of technology weakens some of its holes, it isn't TOC's fault that 9, 10, 12, and 18 are driveable, and the Long Hole isn't particularly long anymore.

TOC DEFINED golf course architecture to generations of architects.  Had all its greensites been like the Himalayas, most courses we play today would have similar greens.  It it had large trees in the center of the fairways, we'd have that on most of today's courses.  You may think those ideas silly or unfair, but in a different world where golf developed without the concept of a sand bunker, how strange would we think the idea of digging a big pit and filling it with sand, and having special rules for how one plays from it?  We would think of that the way we might react to the idea of putting a miniature-golf style windmill on a green.

So if you think some of the holes at TOC are weak, perhaps the lesson to be learned is that golfers need a breather around the turn :-)
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
My hovercraft is full of eels.

D. Kilfara

Re: TOC 8,9 and 10
« Reply #23 on: October 30, 2002, 05:24:14 PM »
Doug, you'll not find a more passionate defender of TOC than me, but to say "Had all [TOC's] greensites been like the Himalayas, most courses we play today would have similar greens" kinda ignores the fact that 99.999% of all holes in the world aren't played to double greens, doesn't it? :)

Chip, TOC *has* to be played repeatedly to be understood. The first two or three times I played it, I enjoyed it mostly because of the history and the sense of timelessness I derived from it, not because I "got it" in any meaningful way. The next six or seven times I played it, I got really frustrated - it always seemed either too easy (huge greens, huge fairways) or too hard (hidden bunkers everywhere, contours to kill me) depending on how lucky I was on any given day, and indeed I began to think that the New Course was at least as good and certainly more the type of golf course I enjoyed. Once I got to the point that I really knew where I was going - and yes, it did take 10+ rounds to get there - I began to understand just how strategic TOC is, even on the simpler holes around the turn. And that's why you really need that much experience to play TOC: it allows you to make choices on almost every shot you hit, even some of your putts on the greens. If you don't really know where you're going, if you can't really feel your way from bunker to bunker and slope to slope, you're not actually making choices; you're trusting to luck. And it's the blessed variety of choices - does any course in the world offer the golfer more options? - which makes TOC what it is. Once you come to recognize this fully, I think you'll be more able to see how holes 8, 9 and 10 give you choices which complement the other choices on offer throughout the rest of the course.

I'm not blaming you for coming to your opinion about the New Course being better than the old; I simply believe that you're in Stage Two of a three-step process. (I developed this theme in a little more depth in my book, for what it's worth.) The Old Course can be enjoyed in many ways, but before you can fully appreciate and enjoy its architecture, you really have to try to get to know it. That's just my opinion, of course, but it rings true with many people I've met and talked to.

If you want a really interesting Scottish golfing holiday, here's what you should do: go to St. Andrews for two weeks and stay there. Buy yourself a Links Trust Season Pass (anyone can get one; the price for visitors living outside of Fife these days is something like $650-700, I think, so once you've played TOC five or six times, it pretty much pays for itself). Play TOC as many times as you want - queue as a single in the morning and in the afternoon, visit each of the New/Jubilee/Eden in turn. Get to know TOC intimately. The investment in time and money will be well worth it - and you won't have to do any traveling if you don't want to. Just a thought....

Cheers,
Darren
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Daryl "Turboe" Boe

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: TOC 8,9 and 10
« Reply #24 on: October 30, 2002, 10:07:20 PM »
John,

I had a couple beers in the company of Tip at the Dunvegan Hotel Pub.  Pretty much on the corner, kind of across the street from Auchtierlonies.  As their motto states "just a 9-iron from The Old Course".  Sounds like it could be the place.

Owner/Barkeep Sheena is quite possibly one of the finest human beings.  And although I will deny it in the presence of my wife, I still wake up in a sweat sometimes thinking about her soft Scottish accent!

http://www.dunvegan-hotel.com/

Check her out!  I mean check it out!!
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
Instagram: @thequestfor3000

"Time spent playing golf is not deducted from ones lifespan."

"We sleep safely in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night to visit violence on those who would do us harm."