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.


Matt_Ward

Do isolated "great" courses benefit from less competition?
« on: August 29, 2006, 10:53:11 AM »
I thought about this on my return home from my visit to the mountain time zone.

With particular emphasis on Sand Hills in Mullen, NE and now having played two strong competitors in Ballyneal and Dismal River.

I have to wonder if courses that are isolated geographically benefit from the lack of competitors nearby. In some ways that lack of competition has only served to highlight the nature of the host course but in so other ways add to its legendary role.

I am planning a forthcoming thread on the nature of the three courses and how they impact one another. However, for now I have to wonder do isolated great courses truly deserve their so-called status or is much of that tied to the fact in being the big fish in the pond they occupy?

Thanks ...

Mark_Fine

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Do isolated "great" courses benefit from less competition?
« Reply #1 on: August 29, 2006, 11:03:27 AM »
Matt,
Royal Dornoch GC is one of my favorite golf courses in the world.  It is a pilgrimage to get there as it seems like you have to get to the edge of the Arctic Circle to play it.  I wonder if it would be the same if it were located on the stretch next to S&A, Hillside and Royal Birkdale?  Something tells me it would still be great but not quite as great because of its location.  
 
« Last Edit: August 29, 2006, 11:04:01 AM by Mark_Fine »

Patrick_Mucci

Re:Do isolated "great" courses benefit from less competition?
« Reply #2 on: August 29, 2006, 11:11:35 AM »
Matt Ward,

I think the answer lies in the following.

If Pumpkin Ridge was in the New York Metro area, would it be a top 10 ?  25 ? 50 ? 100 ?

If Ridgewood was in Oregon, or Iowa or Texas, would it languish behind many other courses in the area ?

ForkaB

Re:Do isolated "great" courses benefit from less competition?
« Reply #3 on: August 29, 2006, 11:17:33 AM »
Pat

If NGLA was in Ayrshire, would it be a top-10 course for Scotland?  I doubt it.

Mark

Very good point regarding Dornoch.  I personally think that RDGC is better than Birkdale, but only slightly.  If Birkdale were located in the Coull links near Embo, and S&A was at Skibo, and Hillside was built over Golspie, it would be great to be able to compare and contrast!

PS--I agree with redanman than Brora should not be touched, even though a started a thread arguing exactly the opposite on that a few years ago..... :)

Matt_Ward

Re:Do isolated "great" courses benefit from less competition?
« Reply #4 on: August 29, 2006, 11:24:12 AM »
Pat Mucci:

I agree Pumpkin Ridge in the NY metro area would be swallowed up but the same can be said for any number of "great" other state courses.

Regarding Ridgewood -- it would not be #1 if it were placed in the states you mentioned? Don't believe so. That honor would go to Pac Dunes, Harvester and Dallas National IMHO for the states of Oregon, Iowa and Texas respectively. No doubt Ridgewood would be higher rated than it is in New Jersey because the depth of competition in the three states you mentioned is less so when compared to the Garden State.

But, I do agree that areas where the competition is stiff the so-called "big" names of other locations can easily drop down considerably.

I can recall Doak's line in "Confidential Guide" concering Cherry Hills and if it were placed in the Philadelphia area and how it would not crack the elite of the Brotherly Love locale.

john_stiles

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Do isolated "great" courses benefit from less competition?
« Reply #5 on: August 29, 2006, 11:33:05 AM »
If Silloth was near Southport, it would still a big fish and on my list to play !

In this case, less competition is a benefit for the course.

Being isolated, away from most of the big tournaments, puts less pressure on the course;  allows it to breathe and relax, rather than being under the knife for any perceived short coming.

Brad Tufts

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Do isolated "great" courses benefit from less competition?
« Reply #6 on: August 29, 2006, 11:37:21 AM »
I've always thought this about Sugarloaf in Maine.  It was an ambitious project yes, but they can't keep the grass growing due to the very short season and the fact that it's tightly surrounded by trees.  It would be a decent course anywhere, but there are mountain courses out west that blow it away...
So I jump ship in Hong Kong....

Matt_Ward

Re:Do isolated "great" courses benefit from less competition?
« Reply #7 on: August 29, 2006, 12:00:27 PM »
Brad:

My issue with Sugarloaf is not that it is rated highly in Maine but the idea that just because it's rock solid in Maine doesn't mean it would merit national considerations.

Too often people think the best of their state can compete on the regional and national level. That's not the case and Sugarloaf is a great example of that IMHO.

Greg Clark

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Do isolated "great" courses benefit from less competition?
« Reply #8 on: August 29, 2006, 01:37:33 PM »
I think it can work both ways Matt.  While not the case with Sand Hills, if a course is isolated geographically it may limit the number of "right" or "influential" people that play it and thus actually reduce it's prestige.

You mention that too many people think their local or state flagship course can compete on a regional or national level, when it reality it falls short.  No doubt there is truth to that.  But there is also IMHO, a regional bias from folks that believe anything new, or not in their more established region, surely can't compare.  Again potentially hurting the course geographically isolated.

I'm not saying your thought doesn't have merit, just that there's a flip side to the coin.

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +2/-1
Re:Do isolated "great" courses benefit from less competition?
« Reply #9 on: August 29, 2006, 01:40:10 PM »
Matt:  I have always felt that originality is one of the components which makes up a great course ... if the style of a course is a bit different, or if there are a couple of great holes which I have not seen the likes of anywhere else, that will elevate a course in my mind.

I have never thought any more of Sand Hills because it was remote, but I do think more of it because of its setting and style and the fact that there was nothing else quite like it.  Now that there are a couple more courses in a similar setting, it loses a point for uniqueness ... although it still gets one more point than Ballyneal or Dismal River, because it was the first of its kind.  

After that, they have to fight it out on their architectural merits.

Likewise, I'm sure that Barnbougle Dunes gets a point or two from people because it is the only real links golf course in that part of the world, and it's competing with a bunch of Sand Belt courses that are all cousins.  And St. Andrews Beach does not benefit from the same advantage.  But, should that matter when you are rating the great courses of the world and Barnbougle and St. Andrews Beach are being compared to all the great links in the UK and Ireland?  That is up to others to answer.

Matt_Ward

Re:Do isolated "great" courses benefit from less competition?
« Reply #10 on: August 29, 2006, 01:46:23 PM »
Greg:

Trust me when I say this -- the top courses are played by people. They may not be played by everyone on GCA but they are played. The day and age of the isolated fishing hole that few, if any, know about is over and it's been over since the Web / Internet became as powerful as it is today.

Greg, I have a solid range of sources that go beyong this site and if I hear even a trinkle of good things about a course you can be sure it's on my radar screen irrespective of whether Doak, C&C or any other of the most favored architects here on GCA has done the work. Check out my comments on the "site lines" thread and you will see mentioned the qualities of Rochelle Ranch / Ken Kavanaugh design in south central Wyoming, as just one case in point.

Another point -- Greg, I am one of the leading proponents of the mountain time zone because too few people have played the wide samplings of solid golf that is there and no doubt is growing. I concur there is too much emphasis on the left and right coasts of the USA and I have been one of those folks who have taken to task a number of the greater NY metro area courses for being overrated and simply living off the same zip code as there more famous golf course neighbors.

Greg -- I hear you loud and clear but you are truly preaching to the choir on this one to me but I'm glad you raised the flip side to the point of this thread.


Doug Ralston

Re:Do isolated "great" courses benefit from less competition?
« Reply #11 on: August 29, 2006, 02:09:01 PM »
If Sand Hills was in Eastern Kentucky's mountains it would only lag behind ER and Dale Hollow ......

Of course, to have it in Eastern KY you would have to cut down the trees, flatten the mountains, and just in general make the land so ugly that the course stood out. That is obviously why it is such a name in Godawful Plains.

Doug

*inno*

Phil McDade

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Do isolated "great" courses benefit from less competition?
« Reply #12 on: August 29, 2006, 03:43:02 PM »
Where would Machrihanish stand if not so isolated? A wonderful course on its merits, and viewed as something of a golf Shangri-La (well, maybe 10-15 years ago), I wonder if it would hold the same spot in people's opinions if it was one of the Ayrshire coast courses, or the North Berwick/Gullane/Muirfield crowd.

I think Matt's right -- in this age of internet technology, I doubt any course anywhere on the planet worth playing can stay incognito for very long. Royal Dornoch was barely known outside the true golf aficionado crowd until Herbert Warren Wind wrote his famous "North to the Links of Dornoch" piece for the New Yorker in 1964. Now that kind of stuff is posted immediately and sent around the world via the interconnecting circles of web technology. Even lots of rudimentary, obscure courses maintain websites these days.


Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +2/-1
Re:Do isolated "great" courses benefit from less competition?
« Reply #13 on: August 29, 2006, 03:54:51 PM »
Phil McDade:

Not quite true.  If there was a great golf course in the non-English-speaking world, it could still be overlooked for quite some time.  There may well be a great course somewhere in China by now, but the information coming out of there is sketchy.

There was a coastal project near Perth, Australia opened the end of last year which got a brief moment of fame on this site.  But that's pretty isolated, only a couple of people have been there, and we haven't heard anything more about it.

HamiltonBHearst

Re:Do isolated "great" courses benefit from less competition?
« Reply #14 on: August 29, 2006, 04:54:09 PM »


Of course they benefit.  At various times I have heard that Sand Hills has the best course, best caddies, best burgers, best place to eat a burger and drink a beer, best logo, best pro-shop, and to top it all off, in a recent missive "best practice range".


HamiltonBHearst

Re:Do isolated "great" courses benefit from less competition?
« Reply #15 on: August 29, 2006, 04:54:59 PM »


I will add they do have the best Jetport in North Platte :)

Phil McDade

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Do isolated "great" courses benefit from less competition?
« Reply #16 on: August 29, 2006, 05:23:05 PM »
Tom:

Well, maybe, but I'd argue a great course worth seeking out to play -- the kind of special trip that Matt discusses -- would be soon promoted on some sort of golf website and known by the greater world without too much delay. I doubt you'd find a great course in rural China, similar to the kind of great courses you find in extremely isolated parts of the U.S. What makes Sand Hills, Ballyneal and Dismal River possible is that, relative to most other parts of the world, the U.S. is a country full of wealth and getting to such places -- and having the financial means to play them -- isn't that great an obstacle if you're determined enough. There may be great courses being built in China, but I'm guessing if they are, they are not being built in the extraordinarily poor, rural areas of that country. They are likely being built near centers of wealth (cities) and communication with/information about/connections with urban China these days is pretty easy, via the internet.

Patrick_Mucci

Re:Do isolated "great" courses benefit from less competition?
« Reply #17 on: August 29, 2006, 05:38:36 PM »

If NGLA was in Ayrshire, would it be a top-10 course for Scotland?  

Yes, I believe it would.

How would Pumpkin Ridge fare ?
[/color]


Patrick_Mucci

Re:Do isolated "great" courses benefit from less competition?
« Reply #18 on: August 29, 2006, 05:41:13 PM »
Pat Mucci:

I agree Pumpkin Ridge in the NY metro area would be swallowed up but the same can be said for any number of "great" other state courses.

Regarding Ridgewood -- it would not be #1 if it were placed in the states you mentioned? Don't believe so.

I never said it would be # 1.

I said, "would it languish behind many of the courses in the area, if it was in Oregon, Iowa or Texas ?
[/color]

« Last Edit: August 29, 2006, 05:42:15 PM by Patrick_Mucci »

Matt_Ward

Re:Do isolated "great" courses benefit from less competition?
« Reply #19 on: August 29, 2006, 06:29:13 PM »
Pat:

Agreed ... Ridgewood would be closer to the top in the states you mentioned than it is now in New Jersey.

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +2/-1
Re:Do isolated "great" courses benefit from less competition?
« Reply #20 on: August 29, 2006, 06:44:58 PM »
Phil:

Nearly all of the isolated courses you mention are trying desperately hard to get the word out so they'll have some business -- so they are unlikely to go unnoticed, in spite of their geography.

That might or might not be the case elsewhere.  Many old-school Japanese courses are very happy with their lack of attention.  And there are places like Ellerston in Australia or Leopard Creek in South Africa or Nanea in Hawaii, which are sort of on the radar, yet hardly anyone on this board could tell you a single detail about them, and you'd have no chance of arranging a game there next month.

Phil McDade

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Do isolated "great" courses benefit from less competition?
« Reply #21 on: August 29, 2006, 11:40:31 PM »
Tom:

I should have been more careful in my use of the word "promoted" in my second response. By promoting, I mean the sort of objective reporting of a course, evaluating its merits/demerits, of the sort that Matt has been doing here on GCA about Ballyneal and Dismal River. (I once drove across a section of Wyoming, and wondered -- why aren't there golf courses out here? This is great terrain. I now know of one, thanks to Matt.)

Of course, any course that wants to stay away from the limelight can do so, and any course that's out of the way that wants to promote play (for financial or other reasons) can do so, as well. The role model, so to speak, that I had in mind was Machrihanish -- by any measure, a very solid links course, but one that's very hard to get to and one that's never gone out of its way to promote itself (I talked to some members there less than enthused about Bamberger's book!). If you dumped a Machrihanish on a remote stretch of Austrailian coast, or in the middle of China, or on the dunesland of Poland, I still maintain it wouldn't take that long for it to get noticed and "promoted," in a Matt Ward-sort of way, thanks to the internet.

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back