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.


Patrick Glynn

  • Karma: +0/-0
Castle Coure at St. Andrews
« on: May 27, 2008, 06:19:48 PM »
Finally got my pictures off my camera & uploaded onto the photobucket. I played St Andrews in April, and after golf one day we took a spin up to see the Castle Course. Bar RCD I have never been as impressed with a course. We actually walked every hole backwards, green to tee. It was pretty neat because there were no flags/markers & you just had to figure out the holes for yourself. I had seen 17 as a par 3 beforehand & knew 9/18 was a double green. I can not wait to play it - though it is a tad expensive!

17 is a long par 3 on the cliff face. What I liked about it was there is a bail-out left & there is the possibility of getting a kick forward onto the green from short left. Green is really fun, with lots of swales & dips, but a generous target for such a long shot.



This picture is taken from the front left of the green & gives you an idea of the contours & also the size of the green.


This is taken from over the green - the bunkers were real "natural" looking & seemed to just appear where nature intended them to. (I realise this is all false since the course was 100% constructed out of farmland!) But you can see how the front of the green is higher, making it possible to run the shot onto the green.



I think this is take from the front of the 18th tee box. One thing I noticed about the entire course is the huge amount of teeing ground. I am still undecided as to whether this is a good thing or not - it wasnt a rare occurrence to have 5 separate possibilities. That said, each one was nicely situated so as to be as unobtrusive as possible - no RTJ Runway Tees for DMK! You will also notice the amount of bunkers and how it totally dominates your vision. A lot of visual intimidation, but the landing areas & widths of fairways are actually very generous.



This is taken from just short right to try and highlight the size of the green (double) and the rise up to the putting surface. Did not really do a good job of either but for completion's sake I will include it.



This picture is taken from the 9th fairway, around 200 yards out. You get a better idea of the size of the green & the angles in play. Really cool feature IMHO.



Random Green, I think its the 7th or 8th with the Old Town in the background. The views really are something else - at Pacific Dunes the Ocean is great and everything, but here you have the height of the cliffs, the ocean, AND the Home of Golf to appreciate!



Next up is a really cool green complex. No bunkers, but a blast to play I'd imagine. I guess you could call it a "Punchbowl" in the weaker sense of the term. I think its the 5th hole but my memory is hazy! First pic is take from just in front, and the next from beyond and left of the green.





The next hole had the most intimidating drive/second shot I have ever seen. I am not 100% on the yardages but there is the ridge you must carry. The day I walked it, it was playing into a 25 mph wind - an awful lot of trust would be involved in going for the green here. Again though - the fairway is really wide, and the green nestled up against the edge of the course. This was one of the few bunkers that weren't perfect / playable over 2 months before opening.

You can see in the pic that its a kind of "skyline fairway" and there is NOTHING to aim at save the ocean. Fun!



Greent, from front left:


Next pic is off the par 3, early in the round - I think the 2nd & gives you some notion of the wildness of the greens.



And finally this is from the front left of the 16th, a par 5 I think.



All in all - this is definitely going to be a must play on any trip to TOC. Interestingly enough the locals say that it will be VERY windy up there on the cliff face, much moreso than at TOC.

Thoughts? Anyone lucky enough to play it yet?

Patrick

« Last Edit: May 27, 2008, 07:04:55 PM by Patrick Glynn »

Garland Bayley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Castle Coure at St. Andrews
« Reply #1 on: May 27, 2008, 06:39:16 PM »
Isn't 18 a dogleg right? Your picture from the tee doesn't look like a dogleg right.
"I enjoy a course where the challenges are contained WITHIN it, and recovery is part of the game  not a course where the challenge is to stay ON it." Jeff Warne

Patrick Glynn

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Castle Coure at St. Andrews
« Reply #2 on: May 27, 2008, 07:03:23 PM »
I think that there is more fairway out to the left & that maybe the picture is taken from in front of the tee boxes. Definately a dogleg right GB.

Garland Bayley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Castle Coure at St. Andrews
« Reply #3 on: May 27, 2008, 07:11:16 PM »
Guess I should have waited until you were done. You have changed the order of the pictures on me.
 :)
"I enjoy a course where the challenges are contained WITHIN it, and recovery is part of the game  not a course where the challenge is to stay ON it." Jeff Warne

Dean Stokes

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Castle Coure at St. Andrews
« Reply #4 on: May 27, 2008, 07:27:25 PM »
IMHO #2 green looks like something I could easily enjoy not playing. If all the greens look like that I will be better off spending $300 playing my local muni 12 times ;D

Why all the massive undulations these days? Whatever happened to flatish, subtle,  hard to read greens and undulations/ run offs leaving them?
Living The Dream in The Palm Beaches....golfing, yoga-ing, horsing around and working damn it!!!!!!!

Patrick Glynn

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Castle Coure at St. Andrews
« Reply #5 on: May 27, 2008, 07:45:22 PM »
Dean - that picture is taken from the right of the green & those slopes IMHO actually make it easier to hit! The green itself is quite large, and the hole is reasonably short par 3 (I think) All in all I think it works. There was no hole/green that I look at and thought - this is tricky golf. Every green complex seemed really well thought out & there were places to miss and/or run the ball onto the greens. I also like the idea of big greens with very definite "sections" to them - much like MacK's 16th as Pasatiempo in fact.

Wayne_Kozun

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Castle Coure at St. Andrews
« Reply #6 on: May 27, 2008, 11:15:30 PM »
What - no photos of the sewage plant?

Jim Johnson

Re: Castle Coure at St. Andrews
« Reply #7 on: May 28, 2008, 01:43:17 AM »
For a great read, get your hands on a copy of "The Seventh at St. Andrews", by Scott Gummer. Complete with a hole-by-hole (each hole's description begins a new chapter) commentary by David McLay Kidd, and photos of the course, and of Kidd and his crew, and their various headquarters (pubs).

Great stuff.

JJ

Tony_Muldoon

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Castle Coure at St. Andrews
« Reply #8 on: May 28, 2008, 02:10:33 AM »
Thanks for posting JJ, there's been  a lot of tending towards negative vibe about it on here.  Good to see someone enthuse and point to the width and green sizes on a windy site.  I hope it's given a chance - you don't hear much complaint about the Kingsbarn green fees now.
Let's make GCA grate again!

Ally Mcintosh

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Castle Coure at St. Andrews
« Reply #9 on: May 28, 2008, 04:25:15 AM »
interestingly, with regards to the green fees which seemed overpriced to me at the time (as well as most others), the castle course was developed primarily to accommodate locals who were finding it harder and harder to get on to the existing courses...

...with this in mind, the green fees make sense seeing as the locals do not have to pay them...

...i think the course looks cracking...

Chris Kane

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Castle Coure at St. Andrews
« Reply #10 on: May 28, 2008, 04:31:03 AM »
Ally, I don't agree at all.  The only course which is difficult for locals to get onto is the Old Course (and even then, they have their own ballot which makes the odds better).  During my year there I never waited more than half an hour to play one of the other courses.

In my opinion, the Castle Course was built to provide another "premium" option for rich tourists who will pay whatever is charged.  I imagine the Links Trust found it frustrating to watch Kingsbarns flourishing at £150 a game.  The Castle Course is their chance to get a second go at that market (who play the Old Course at £130 a game).

Ally Mcintosh

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Castle Coure at St. Andrews
« Reply #11 on: May 28, 2008, 04:45:15 AM »
You may be right Chris... And that would certainly be the popular perception... But I am only reporting secondhand what Adam Lawrence reported in the latest issue of Golf Course Architecture... He said that he was surprised to find that this was the case.

Melvyn Morrow

Re: Castle Coure at St. Andrews
« Reply #12 on: May 28, 2008, 06:47:23 AM »
Looking at the latest photos of The Castle Course shows just how alien the land has become.

My memories of the late 1950’s, the 60’s and 70’s give me the view of a slight slope of fields falling towards the view of St Andrews in the distance. Of crops swirling in the wind on a warm late summers day. My little sister being Christened in the small church in the middle of all these fields near Boarhills.

I have not played the course, I don’t know if it is worth the £2.5 million spent on it, but it does look out of place in my memory. All those new small hills, lumps, dumps and new sand traps just make me feel uncomfortable with the way the land is today. Last year when in St Andrews, I passed by the course, feeling a sadness as if the land was crying, was it for joy or from being raped. My own feeling generated from years of knowing the area as farm land may be the reason for my sad disposition.

But the land is now a course and I suppose I should proceed there later this  year with an open  mind. But sometimes memories can cloud the issue, my sister is no longer with us so I should try and be fair, after all we had great fun playing in the fields. Yet the course still looks alien and out of place to me.

Wayne_Kozun

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Castle Coure at St. Andrews
« Reply #13 on: May 28, 2008, 09:08:20 AM »
You may be right Chris... And that would certainly be the popular perception... But I am only reporting secondhand what Adam Lawrence reported in the latest issue of Golf Course Architecture... He said that he was surprised to find that this was the case.
This is also the reason given at the beginning of "Seventh at St Andrews".  Whether that is really true or not will only be known by the Links Trust. 

Scott Macpherson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Castle Coure at St. Andrews
« Reply #14 on: May 28, 2008, 09:09:25 AM »
Like Many, I am trying to keep an open mind about the Castle course until I play it... about 10 times.

I worked on the construction of the 2 courses next door formerly known as 'St Andrews Bay', and from that experience can confidently say that it is a windy site, and perhaps unusually, the wind comes off the land. I am wondering if the castle course will need to do what Kingsbarns did, and have to rebuild (soften) some of the greens a year or two after the course has opened. This would not reflect well on the architect.

More on my mind however is a general thought. This course is claiming to be a links course (it's not), but why are courses that want to reflect the great virtues of the best links sooooo undulating? The great links are generally quite soft with long lines. These faux links are more like caricatures of a links. Some quote like 'Marilyn Munroe with hives' rings a bell.

Anyway, the combination of windy site and undulations on steriods does not bode well. As as for it being the first new course in St Andrews for a hundred years (as claimed on the cover of the book), how about The Strathtyrum, The Eden, the Belgrove (9 holes), and the two courses at St Andrews Bay? Hype, Hype, Hype.

I have a allergy to media hype. And this course has suffered from that.  The books, magazine articles, photos and egos etc I look forward to hearing the views of the only people who matter- the golfers.  

Wayne_Kozun

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Castle Coure at St. Andrews
« Reply #15 on: May 28, 2008, 09:16:03 AM »
I agree with you Scott about the hype - the other courses mentioned - Strathtyrum, Balgove and Eden aren't really Championship courses and they give some excuse about the St Andrews Bay courses.

The thing that is special about St Andrews golf is the Old Course.  When I go all the way from Canada to St Andrews I am really only interested in playing the Old Course as much as possible.  If I had to pay 200 pounds per round for the Old Course and the New, Jubilee and Castle courses were free I would still play 36 a day on the Old Course if I could.

Scott Macpherson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Castle Coure at St. Andrews
« Reply #16 on: May 28, 2008, 09:32:53 AM »
Wayne,

I can tell you that had the farm that Dr Panoz bought (a potato and Broccoli farm) and built St Andrews Bay on not been inside the St Andrews Postal code (KY16), he would not have bought it. So that the author (Gummer) of 'The Seventh Course at St Andrews' dismisses those two course as being outside St Andrews just for the sake of an (inaccurate) sub-heading to his book, should make everyone who reads the book have a bowl of salt beside them when they read it. :-\

Adam Clayman

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Castle Coure at St. Andrews
« Reply #17 on: May 28, 2008, 10:33:33 AM »
IMHO #2 green looks like something I could easily enjoy not playing. If all the greens look like that I will be better off spending $300 playing my local muni 12 times ;D

Why all the massive undulations these days? Whatever happened to flatish, subtle,  hard to read greens and undulations/ run offs leaving them?

While there are different interpretations of subtle, flatish hard to read greens seems oxymoronic.

Trying to figure out what the shaper was thinking is not fun. Calculating the convergence of differing slopes is fundamental to rewarding the aware golfer. Barely breathing on putts that break less than a cup, is not only repetitive, it's less challenging. IMO, of course. 
"It's unbelievable how much you don't know about the game you've been playing your whole life." - Mickey Mantle

Gary Slatter

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Castle Coure at St. Andrews
« Reply #18 on: May 28, 2008, 01:00:53 PM »
Like Many, I am trying to keep an open mind about the Castle course until I play it... about 10 times.

I worked on the construction of the 2 courses next door formerly known as 'St Andrews Bay', and from that experience can confidently say that it is a windy site, and perhaps unusually, the wind comes off the land. I am wondering if the castle course will need to do what Kingsbarns did, and have to rebuild (soften) some of the greens a year or two after the course has opened. This would not reflect well on the architect.

More on my mind however is a general thought. This course is claiming to be a links course (it's not), but why are courses that want to reflect the great virtues of the best links sooooo undulating? The great links are generally quite soft with long lines. These faux links are more like caricatures of a links. Some quote like 'Marilyn Munroe with hives' rings a bell.

Anyway, the combination of windy site and undulations on steriods does not bode well. As as for it being the first new course in St Andrews for a hundred years (as claimed on the cover of the book), how about The Strathtyrum, The Eden, the Belgrove (9 holes), and the two courses at St Andrews Bay? Hype, Hype, Hype.

I have a allergy to media hype. And this course has suffered from that.  The books, magazine articles, photos and egos etc I look forward to hearing the views of the only people who matter- the golfers.  

Good comments Scott.  I don't like the book about the Castle and I really enjoy your book about the Old Course evolving.  I've played the Castle Course and walked it with several other groups while they played it.  It is quite windy, the present greens will be very challenging if they are faster than 8.  I find the course unfair to average length players, easy for better players with plenty of birdies available for all.  There are a few fairways where a perfect drive can be unplayable but I feel these will be "improved" within the first year.   It is not a Kingsbarns, it is the first of its type.  It will be an interesting summer to see how the real jury votes!
Gary Slatter
gary.slatter@raffles.com

Wayne_Kozun

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Castle Coure at St. Andrews
« Reply #19 on: May 28, 2008, 01:48:25 PM »
I don't like the book about the Castle and I really enjoy your book about the Old Course evolving.
At the beginning of the book it emphasizes that the book is "not for golf architecture wonks".  Who is a golf architecture wonk if not for those of us who populate this discussion forum?  Therefore it wasn't written for the likes of us!

Scott Macpherson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Castle Coure at St. Andrews
« Reply #20 on: May 28, 2008, 02:19:52 PM »
Thanks Gary for your nice comments. Perhaps my book is for 'golf wonks'? Who knows. It is packed with data, and bordering on the esoteric. Perfect for this group huh?

I like golf books and own hundreds, but I can't read the book on the Castle course because I can't get past the lie on the cover. Perhaps it follows the old mantra.... 'Don't ruin a good story with the truth'.

scott

Tim Pitner

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Castle Coure at St. Andrews
« Reply #21 on: May 28, 2008, 02:49:35 PM »
More on my mind however is a general thought. This course is claiming to be a links course (it's not), but why are courses that want to reflect the great virtues of the best links sooooo undulating? The great links are generally quite soft with long lines. These faux links are more like caricatures of a links. Some quote like 'Marilyn Munroe with hives' rings a bell.

Scott,

I wonder the same thing.  Somewhere along the line, it seems that the dunesy links courses--the Ballybunions, Cruden Bays and Carnes--have become the standard for what a links course should be, even though many excellent links are much flatter.  Many posters here also seem to subscribe to the view that "the more undulating, the better," both with respect to fairways and greens.  I don't.  While playing through and among heaving dunes can be great fun, there's a lot to be said for long views and more subtle lines too. 

Scott Macpherson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Castle Coure at St. Andrews
« Reply #22 on: May 28, 2008, 04:09:20 PM »
To make an analogy.... if the girl next door had 'A' cups, she could be just as attractive than the girl with 'double D's'. With links, it's not the size of the lumps, its the placement and proportion. ;)

Kalen Braley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Castle Coure at St. Andrews
« Reply #23 on: May 28, 2008, 04:10:45 PM »
To make an analogy.... if the girl next door had 'A' cups, she could be just as attractive than the girl with 'double D's'. With links, it's not the size of the lumps, its the placement and proportion. ;)

That right there, just might be post of the year.  Hard to argue against that one!!!



Joe Bentham

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Castle Coure at St. Andrews
« Reply #24 on: May 28, 2008, 06:39:20 PM »
Scott--
You need to look no further then the inside front flap of the book for clarification of this point.  The Castle course is the first championship course built by the Links Trust since 1914.  The course they've built weren't championship courses (you said it yourself).  And the courses at St. Andrews Bay weren't built by the links trust (something you also said).

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back