Portrush Valley Pics

[Paul_Turner]

Thanks for the positive comments, I hope more will check out The Valley.

The only difference I could see between the Dunluce and Valley was that the greens were watered more on the Dunluce.  Probably because the course is played more. 

I'll restate that I've never seen grass that looked as tough as on The Valley...almost indestructable!

A pic of Skerries on Dunluce:



SPDB

I don't know a great deal about how Portrush was built.  But I do have an obituary essay by Sir Anthony Babington who was the main driving force behind Portrush, was a close friend of Colt's (stayed with him on visits to england) and got him the firm's other big jobs in Ireland:  Belvoir, R Belfast and R Dublin.  He does state in the obit that Colt had a free hand and that both Dunluce and Valley courses were designed by Colt.

In the club history (I don't have) there is a plan of the original Portrush course; it's mainly down in the "War Hollow" area of the Valley...from memory I don't think there's anything left of that 18.

[Thomas MacWood]

Paul
Wonderful photos. That course looks like it would be hell of a lot of fun. Was this course built around the same time as the championship course? What is its history?

[Paul_Turner]

Tom

I don't really have the answers to your questions...but I think it's probable that the Valley was done in the same years 1932-33 as the Dunluce.

James

I forgot to answer your question.  From the back, the bunker on 16 is about 220 to carry.  Usually into the wind.

[James Boon]

Many thanks for the photos, Paul. I now wish I had played the Valley when I was there, but I only managed a round on the Dunluce. Hopefully I can get back there and the Valley will be my first priority! Tony Muldoon’s comments regarding the 14th on the Dunluce reminded me of my 5 wood to 20 ft and 2 putt par in quite a cross wind, but I digress…

Reading this thread I remembered that recently I got a copy of the club’s history written by Ian Bamford in 1988 that I haven’t got round to reading, so I’ve had a quick look through.

It states that Colt originally designed the 2 courses in 1923 but there were land ownership issues to be resolved. In 1931 when these had been resolved Colt suggested that the “comprehensive new layout for two courses” would cost £7,000 but that he would prefer £10,000 to be spent, Sir Anthony Babington advised him that the club could not afford such expenditure and the project was nearly abandoned. In 1932 a compromise to shape out the greens and fairways to a playable extent was agreed upon at a cost to not exceed £3,200. The work was carried out by Franks, Harris and Company who had worked successfully with Colt before and the supervising architect was William A. Murray who worked for Colt. Work was carried out so fast that the course was in play at Easter of 1933 and formally opened that July. The implication is that this was the Dunluce only.

The book then goes on to state that the Ladies course (The Valley) was centred around a new ladies clubhouse built in 1928 and the old ladies course, including several holes in the triangle (?) were abandoned. The present valley course was developed piecemeal as time and finances allowed “and was the first love of Sir Anthony Babington after the completion of the Dunluce course”. The present 5th and 6th were the last significant additions and improvements. Previously the present 4th was 2 holes, a short par 4 from the present 4th tee to a green tucked into the hills on the right of the fairway about 200 yards from the 4th green, then a par 3 of some 220 yards from a tee on the left of the present fairway. The presnt 9th was the 8th and the 9th was a short hole over a large rough covered hollow to a green lying between the present 18th green and 1st tee, the contours of which are stated to be still visible? The present second nine was continually being improved upon by the efforts of Sir Anthony and Hughie McNeill.

Having not played the Valley, and the fact that its late here, I hope that all makes sense? If not, let me know and I can have another look in the book…

Cheers,

James

[Andy Levett]

The Valley is the best 'second course' I've played, ahead of Saunton West, Gleneagles Queens and the New at St Andrews. 8-10 is a superb run and it's good the way the parallel holes on the flatter terrain - 4, 7, 12-14 don't all come in one go.
The really hidden 'hidden gem' at Portrush could be the pitch and putt though. Seriously, from the dune above the beach it looked a hoot, through some of the best of the terrain. Wish I'd had time to give it a go.
Here's a few snaps to fill in the gaps between Paul's pics. Much greener - nothing to do with maintenance, just a lot of water (literally) flowing under the bridge between early and late summer!
Great tee-shot on 10:


Gentle opening green:


Angled fairway on 2. (The forward tee is in the same dune as the massive fairway bunker on Dunluce 16):


2nd green:


..and from the left:

[Sean_A]

Tom

I don't really have the answers to your questions...but I think it's probable that the Valley was done in the same years 1932-33 as the Dunluce.

James

I forgot to answer your question.  From the back, the bunker on 16 is about 220 to carry.  Usually into the wind.

Paul

Its good to see that Colt's original design of light bunkering has been stick to.  There doesn't appear to be many beyond the original # of 11. 

I was reading some stuff of Pennink and he claims:

1. Colt thought that Portrush was his best design.

2. Colt originally worked on the course before WWI. I must admit something seems wrong here.  I wonder if Pannink meant WWII?

3. Back in 1961 Portrush had a fearsome rep for tight fairways and long rough.  Perhaps things haven't changed so much over the years.

Ciao

[SPDB]

What do people think about the relative qualities of the land on which
the Valley and Dunluce sit? I think the Valley is better grounds for golf,
which makes it remarkable to me that the Dunluce emerged (or was planned?)
as the better course.