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.


Michael Christensen

Re:Muirfield (pictures)
« Reply #25 on: June 21, 2007, 05:06:36 PM »
Philip,

Yep...Greywalls is nice, especially on someone else's dime..err shilling!  How fast was the practice green running in the back?  It was still a little sandy when I was there...a little better than how #13 played that day.

I am trying to get back in the fall....maybe wrap all the Gullane courses with North Berwick and St Andrews.

Mark_Rowlinson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Muirfield (pictures)
« Reply #26 on: June 21, 2007, 05:45:42 PM »
Philip,  What you have here is an example of why GCA is so great.  You don't have arty-farty photos of the course, lovely and important as those may be in other circumstances.  You have practical photos, seen from the discerning golfer's point of view, with an appropriate commentary.  It's important that this work is archived and made easily available to golf scholars throughout the world.  I know Ran is improving this site - easy, permanent access to material of this kind is GCA's strongest card.

Pete Lavallee

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Muirfield (pictures)
« Reply #27 on: June 21, 2007, 11:43:55 PM »
Great photos Philip, thanks for taking the time to both capture and post them.
"...one inoculated with the virus must swing a golf-club or perish."  Robert Hunter

G Jones

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Muirfield (pictures)
« Reply #28 on: June 22, 2007, 03:06:39 AM »
thanks for the photos... i'd forgotten about the caddy paths through the rough (that you can see up the right of the 18th). Muirfield rough is pretty bad in my experience - from a links point of view beaten only by Carnoustie... just thinking of pros flailing about in the rough next month is making me smile already  ;D

Philip Gawith

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Muirfield (pictures)
« Reply #29 on: June 22, 2007, 06:44:40 AM »
Thanks for kind words Mark. I regard myself as a complete novice when it comes to taking intelligent photos of golf courses - and I am certainly not beyond taking "golf porn" pics! Indeed, there is surely room for both - sometimes the pictures I like most are the ones which somehow capture the atmosphere or experience of a course/place (rather than any particular strategic element).

But you are right re GCA inasmuch as there are many learned folk around - step forward Doug, Sean et al - who can comment intelligently on the canvas that others have provided (not to mix too many metaphors!).

KBanks

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Muirfield (pictures)
« Reply #30 on: June 22, 2007, 03:22:54 PM »
Phillip,

Please add mine to the chorus of thanks for the great photos.

I love the look of the sand in those bunkers, it looks so natural and in accord with the surroundings. Are any of the Muirfield bunkers not visible to the golfer?

Does HCEG have any designs upon the dunesland that is closer to the firth?

Ken

Philip Gawith

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Muirfield (pictures)
« Reply #31 on: June 22, 2007, 04:52:00 PM »
Ken - HCEG owns the land you refer to.  And very desirable it is too - when Tom Doak showed some of us round the nextdoor Renaissance Club, he eyed it covetously!

If it were up to them,  i don't think the land would be developed. After all, why would you want to dilute the exclusivity of your club (and probably destroy its character?) by doubling its size? I think they have about 700 members, but only a small portion of those play regularly so it is not as if the course is congested.

If, however, the laws of the land were to change such that an all male club ceased to be legal, then building a second course might provide them with a means of seeking to adapt to the new situation.

I raise the latter possibility because there are already noises that the government plans to outlaw clubs discriminating between male and female members (the status quo with many/most clubs where women pay lower dues for restricted access). This law does not I don't think extend to Muirfield which is men only, but you could imagine that a next step might extend to all male clubs.

To your question of hidden bunkers: there are too many for me to recall them all, but yes there certainly are quite a few bunkers you can't see. One example would be the central bunker short on the ninth fairway. You can see it in the photo i have shown, but not if you are standing back in the fairway hitting your approach. If memory serve a number of greenside bunkers are not visible - but we are not talking "sneaky" hidden such as you encounter on TOC.

Matt_Sullivan

Re:Muirfield (pictures)
« Reply #32 on: June 22, 2007, 07:05:39 PM »
Philip
Many thanks for the photos. I saved some of them to my hard drive -- hope you don't mind. Brings back fond memories of our day there in late March.

Matt

KBanks

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Muirfield (pictures)
« Reply #33 on: June 22, 2007, 08:30:47 PM »
Philip,

Thanks for your response, that's very interesting. It is good to know that the club owns the property, and fascinating to ponder the possibilities of it. They're not making any more true linksland.

One hopes that any decision to build a new links would be based solely on the golfing merits, and not upon any legal compulsion.

Can you imagine the expectations if they ever decided to build a second course there?

Ken

Andrew Mitchell

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Muirfield (pictures)
« Reply #34 on: June 25, 2007, 01:13:59 PM »
Philip

Thanks for the photos. We had a great day there in March - lucky you for going back a second time!

The pictures of the 8th and 18th certainly show how the rough has grown in the last three months. I'm not convinced I'd have got round with the same ball this time!

2014 to date: not actually played anywhere yet!
Still to come: Hollins Hall; Ripon City; Shipley; Perranporth; St Enodoc

Mike McGuire

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Muirfield (pictures)
« Reply #35 on: June 30, 2007, 05:14:41 AM »
Philip,

Are balls hit in the hay automatically lost, or are they findable?

Are any of the lies in the rough of the wispy variety?

Last tuesday....... rough very brutal. Most holes basically OB down both sides.