[Mark Bourgeois]

It is, by far, the greatest course I ever have played: the 12 holes from the West course combined with 6 from the East into a powerhouse.

Why is it great? Because in my personal experience:

• It offers plenty of width, zero repeat zero water (= death) hazards yet does not come within 24,000 miles of boring.  It is the course that proves playability, fun, challenge, and "championship test" all can be mentioned in the same sentence.  It is the course that, perhaps outside TOC (perhaps not), shatters all these forced compromises the most thoroughly.  It is a course that renders the hypothetical real and therefore I (a layman) would imagine Royal Melbourne to be of priceless architectural merit.  (Note the distinction to historical or cultural merit.)
  
• It has more great holes than any other course I've played, and for their class, (using the West / East hole designations here) RMW3, RMW5, RMW6, and RMW10 lay a claim as possibly the best in my experience. Honestly, someone could name any hole as their favorite on the course, possibly even in his opinion the best on the course, and with one exception I would not blink an eye.  And that exception is pretty good -- not only that, but I have had conversations with members who argue the point.  But even there, in those conversations they agree there's just one weak hole.  They just pick the other hole which might be "just okay" -- one which I like very much!
  
• The mix of holes, from the par 3s (given there are only three) to the best collection of short / medium 4s I've ever seen and ditto for long 4s / par 4.5s, is without peer.  When you play the Composite the holes go from strength to strength.
• A great drive merely privileges you to accept a greater challenge.  It is necessary, but insufficient, a condition which surprisingly leads to great pressure on the driver, yet there are few dramatic carries involved, certainly nothing pornographic in a golf sense.  The drama is between your ears.  You simply must put the ball in the right spot, but for that accomplishment you simply get the chance to try something really difficult -- if you are going for a score.
• The routing finds excellent locations for the greens and provides some fun tee shots.  Honestly, though, I have a weird test for a routing: disorientation.  I find the courses I get the biggest kicks out of are ones where I always seem to be in a different place than I am.  Another way to put this is when you see the clubhouse or another hole and wonder, "What is that doing THERE?"  I find it amazing how Mackenzie not only found the green site for RMW 7 {note: not a Mackenzie hole, see Neil C's reply below}, but how he found a way to fit all those other great holes around it!  I still get disoriented walking down RME 17 and seeing that big bunker-infested hill on RMW4.  RME17 green looks like a different green when viewed from RMW1.  And I must insist that RME18 is NOT the same hole you see from RMW1 tee!  As these bizarre anecdotes suggest, there's an economy in the routing (discussed in the post on the Composite 3rd (RME1).  And the property might be the best I ever have seen for golf, including linksland.  Sandy soil with lovely movement.
  
• The architects and caretakers got the little things right, like mounding, bunker style, panoramic vistas.
• The greens are utterly fascinating and worthy of endless study.
• The bunkering is beautiful, and one in particular is the most-amazing I ever have seen or possibly ever will see.  It is like a little diorama, a microcosm, of what deep down the game of golf is all about.
• It has a rich history, including professional tournaments as well as its alluring genesis.
• It is not a million miles long, or even a million kilometers long.  Not yet, anyway.

This is not to say the course is perfect.  As pictures show, it has suffered from the drought. (The club has built a massive reservoir that should improve fairway conditions.) And the ti-trees need to be pruned back in spots.  Then there's that matter of one hole being merely okay...

I will try to note the many great things in the pictures, but honestly there's a lot to remember.  Not only that, I probably have misremembered some of the history and anecdotes -- sorry!

1st hole (RMW 1): 429-yard par 4.  We start with the famously wide fairway, but as with much out here, there is a lot more than meets the eye.  The right greenside bunker stands sentinel over the tee.  Best to drive out to the left, which requires the golfer to challenge the ti-trees.  These trees by the way originally were not there but were introduced to protect golfers coming up the Composite's 18th hole, which runs parallel (reverse) left.  There is rough over there but if the hole is located anywhere to the right, that's a better place to be than having to challenge the bunker.

So the golfer who wants a 4 really needs to place his tee shot carefully in this massive fairway, and he needs to think about the location of the flag. The size of the greens makes hole location a meaningful factor.  For example, if it's anywhere near the bunker, the golfer really needs to get over to the left.

Right from the start, we see a good drive is required just so the golfer is given the privilege of a challenging shot.  In other words, a good drive invites a challenge.  This is the essence of the scoring test, at least from tee to green.  It's the golfer who seeks to post a number who will feel the vise tighten.  A golfer content to play for a 5 plays his second shot short and left, avoiding the bunker, and pitches up.  This pitch is anything but straightforward however: a subtle hollow in front of the green (there's a larger one in the back) can set the small muscles twitching.  And there's so much green to negotiate, that's another little math problem the golfer must solve.


1 Green -- as with all the greens out here, the size and contour offer a stern defense, and the cleverly-placed bunkers must be avoided if the golfer hopes for a score.  That's the green front left -- the second green is RME 17.  This type of disorienting vista, where more than one green is not only visible but on or near the line of vision, is common here.


The tee for the 2nd hole (RMW 2) is reached by a short walk behind 1 green.  480 yards and played as a par 5 for members and a 4 for the pros, the golfer must decide if his game and the wind allow an aggressive route over the heavily-bunkered corner.  The hole is Z-shaped with a strategy similar to the 5th hole at Bethpage Black: a safe route to the left is available, but that condemns the golfer to a 5 at best.


The golfer who takes the aggressive route and succeeds receives not a "reward" but rather a sterner test: does he go for the green?  Confoundingly, this green is heavily canted to the left, yet does not appear nearly so.  In practice this means the green must be approached from the right.  Under firm and fast conditions, the green complex cannot be attacked via a simple air route.  Bunkers left and right must be avoided at all costs, but especially the right bunker as it sits higher than the green.  The speed of the greens renders their playing size much smaller; chips, pitches and sand shots to greens running away from the golfer are very, very difficult up-and-downs.  Of course, because the play is to the right, the perfect entrance just a narrow slot, the golfer finds himself unnerved by having to aim at the bunker he absolutely must avoid!

Just a very challenging shot, one of those you've got to see in your head then really commit to.  Hard to believe, but the back left flag in the picture below must be "attacked" via a shot that lands well short and right.


Bedtime -- I will try to get to the rest of the holes over the holidays, sorry for the piecemeal approach!

Mark

[Philippe Binette]

It might not be the world's greatest, but it is perfection in relation to Mackenzie's principles.

[Steve Lapper]

I wholeheartedly agree with Mark's assessment. Out of the the many wonderful venues I've had the privilege of playing, none combine the very best features of playability(risk-reward), test(challenge), strength(shot-value diversity), natural integrity(lays right on the land,  little hand-of-man imprint), architectural perfection, and fun (sportiness).

Pine Valley, Sand Hills, Cypress, Shinnecock, and TOC et.al. are all magnificent and worthy, yet none of them strike the balance, tone and the consistent meld of sport and test, like Royal Melbourne Composite. Pictures rarely do it justice and usually fail to reflect the raw (and wholly) natural landscape of the surrounding gum and other trees as they aesthetically frame the perfect bunkering and green sites.

I've had the privilege of playing three rounds on the composite layout and would happily face a sentence of having no other course to play ever again.

Bravo!

[Mark Bourgeois]

The 3rd hole is borrowed from the East course, where it serves as the opener.  A par 4 of only 333 yards, play is defined by two features: an enormous bunker smack in the center of the double fairway -- RMW 8, not part of the Composite, runs parallel, another TOC-like feature -- and a green severely angled so as to favor driving the ball down the left side of the hole. 

The tee shot is uncharacteristically intimidating.  The preferred line is down the left, but the problem is a fairway that slopes pretty severely to the left.  So the golfer finds himself challenging the bunker on the right.

1 Tee: the enormous fairway bunker is not visible


And what a beautiful bunker it is: this picture is a perfect embodiment of Mackenzie's instructions for bunker slopes.  Their slope should be graduated, for several reasons: balls will not get caught on the slope, the imitation of nature (man's eye will not see them as contrived or counter to the unwritten laws of nature), and to prevent the face or lip from caving in (military antecedent). This also illustrates the perfect quality of the sand in Sandringham. (Note also the "binocular" delusion: that's RMW8 green over to the right.)


Now to the green.  A few things to note.

First, not apparent but the bunker short-right does double duty as a short-left bunker for RMW 8.  Economy arguably was Mackenzie's defining principle, and RME 1 offers an excellent example of what he meant.  Economy doesn't simply mean cheaper design and maintenance, it can be a method or a constraint.  In sharing bunkers, Mackenzie shows cost saving.  But in sharing fairways, Mackenzie shows a type of minimalism.  Most significantly, the two holes side by side show how Mackenzie achieved his goal of playability without resorting to anything more than necessary.  It's an economy of playability.

This picture shows, from left to right, RMW9 (tee bottom left), RMW8 (green lower left), and RME1 (Composite 3): this could well be one fairway divided by bunkers into sections.


Also of note, being in any greenside bunker will leave the golfer with a shot that must achieve altitude quickly yet very likely cover some distance -- more critically though some crazy slope.  The bunkers like perpendicular to the slope, so you've got to do difficult vector analysis.  Watching the spinning ball swing crazily on the sloped green is like watching a drunk negotiate a San Francisco sidewalk.  This slope is far more pronounced than appears and is equal in the golfer's consideration to the angle of the green.  In other words, the golfer needs to drive his ball to the left not simply to negotiate the greenside bunkers, but to hit into the slope of the green.  Neat, huh?

Two photos below show the green complex from well to the left of the hole's centerline -- well left is the preferred angle as hopefully the pictures show.  Incidentally, members have so many holes out here where they share a story about this or that professional golfer coming to ruin.  If not mistaken, this is the green that set Lee Trevino off.  "Get a good look at me now," he reportedly said, "because you won't see me come through those gates again."  And he hasn't.  (This, I believe, was the year the pros staged an en-masse strike because the greens were too fast!)


Note how beautifully the green is benched into a slope, one of many examples of how well the land is used. The hollow short of the green gives many a golfer fits!


Looking back from the green, we wonder what the fuss was all about.  We also see another defining characteristic of the routing: multi-hole, sweeping vistas.


Mark

[Carl Rogers]

This thread is a compelling arguement for:
- cutting back the length of the ball
- banning titanium
- reducing the size of the 4600cc driver to maybe 380cc
- no club longer than 43.5 inches

This Course should be eternally relevant.

The longish par 4's need to be driver & 5 iron for the best players in the world ... not 3 metal & gap wedge

[Sean Leary]

How is the walk with the composite course compared to the normal West routing? How often is it played by the members and the public?

[Mark Bourgeois]

Carl, and there really aren't any par 5s out there for pros, the tragedy there perhaps that some of the risk-reward may have been lost.

Of course, I don't think the course ever had a reputation for being overly long.  Its greens and bunkers are where most of the stories about the pros reside. Sam Snead in the 1959 Canada Cup described the Composite as "a great big bear trap which is set to grab you if you make a false step."

Sean, the only awkward element to the Composite routing is having to walk past the incredible RME16 without playing it.  Otherwise, unlike the East and West the Composite does not involve crossing any streets and so I think it the best walk of the three.

There actually have been several Composite routings and I've always meant to work out just how many potential combos there are.  To tell the truth, when I played it earlier this year I played a different routing than this "official" one I am going through.

As far as frequency of play, I think there's a members' Composite tournament once a year, but other times golfers can get into big trouble if they freelance a round!  (A clue to this came when the pro suggested we give the Composite a go.  It was a sleepy Sunday afternoon over a holiday weekend.  He went back into his office, unlocked a cabinet and produced a scorecard.  All that was missing from this scene was a buzzer, a peephole, and instructions to say "Mick Morcom likes Burke and Wills"!!!  The round was a furtive affair.)

So...how did you manage it, Steve?

Philippe, interesting exercise comparing course to principles.  Here's my take in italics -- what's your opinion?
1: Two loops of nine returning to clubhouse.
Nope

2: A large proportion of good two shot holes, two or three drive and pitch holes and at least four one shotters (par 3s).
Check on first two, but only 3 par 3s

3: Little walking between greens and tees with a slight walk forward from the green to the next tee to allow for additional length if needed in the future.
Check on the first part; some holes could be stretched but many have been maxed out

4: Undulating fairways and greens but no hill climbing.
Only qualification is how to define "hill;" if we define it as steep and long climbs then we can check off this principle

5: Every hole possessing a different character.
I would say the only shot that feels similar are the tee shots on 9 and 10 (RMW11 and RMW12, respectively)

6: A minimum of blindness for approach shots.
Check

7: Beautiful surroundings with all artificial features appearing to be natural.
Check

8: Sufficient heroic carries from the tee but with holes planned to provide alternative routes for the weaker player who is prepared to give up a shot or portion of one to avoid a hazard.
Check

9: An infinite variety in the strokes so that the use of every club is required.
Check, at least for me!

10: An absence of the need to look for lost balls.
Check -- well, there is scrub to the sides and under drought conditions the ball may more easily run off, but the massive width and bunkers keep the ball findable for the great majority of shots

11: A course so interesting that both low and high handicappers are stimulated to improve their games by attempting shots they have hiterto been unable to play.
Check

12: A course arranged so that the high handicapper or even beginner should enjoy their round regardless of their score.
Check

13: A course equally good over the entire playing season with the texture of greens, approaches and fairways perfect.
Not under current drought conditions!  But the course's legacy for conditions is formidable. Mick Morcom is a legend...

So I wouldn't say the Composite is perfect as far as the number of principles it embodies.  But where it is perfect in relation to Mackenzie's principles is in how well, how thoroughly, it achieves those principles it does meet.

Also, I think those principles it does meet are more important than the ones it doesn't.  The first two for example are at the whim of whatever committee decides the routing to be.

The 1959 Canada Cup was the first time a Composite routing was employed.  Although Russell was still alive, according to the club history Russell had no input into that routing.  Perhaps Neil Crafter would know if Russell contemplated the possibility of a Composite routing.  I would guess the idea might have come to him as he designed and built the East course.

Mark

[Mark Bourgeois]

The 4th hole (RME2) is a 440 yard par 5 which like the par 4 2nd plays more like a par 4.5.  Also like the 2nd, a Z-shaped hole: a dogleg to the right of the tee, a green offset to the left of the second-half of the fairway.  The 4th green is set upon a hill, which this makes the hole play longer than its yardage.  This brings the 4th's playing yardage closer to the 2nd's.

And yet while the holes share these similarities, no one would confuse the two.  The tee shots and greens appear unique.  For example, the 2nd deploys bunkers in the dogleg, whereas the 4th uses brush and trees to incite worry.

Because of that offset, the golfer must challenge the dogleg off the tee.  If he hits a long drive but too far left, he must carry his ball across a gaping bunker, up a hill, to the green.  No matter the position, because of the green's elevation his second shot must carry all the way to the green and nearly to the flag.

A good drive merely invites the golfer to take a heroic shot.  The penalty for failure is likely to be higher than a 5.  The green is treacherous to putt and the bunkers deep.

4th Fairway: note the leftward cant of the green, as well as the role played by the lefthand bunker. The ideal position of the tee shot is center-right, but any well-hit drive privileges the golfer to decide whether to go for it


4 Approach


Mark

[Andrew Summerell]

Thanks for your pictures, Mark.

I wouldn’t say it’s the greatest I’ve played in the world, but it is the greatest in my home country.

There is a charity event played over the composite course (I think it’s annually) that you can pay to play.

[Neil_Crafter]

Excellent thread Mark.

A couple of comments. The current RMW7 par three, also the 7th on the Composite, is NOT a Mackenzie/Russell/Morcom hole. The first version of this hole was essentially a modified version of the old Sandringham course's 9th hole, known as Mount Misery. A new green was built to the east of the old one and the hole still played considerably uphill, hence the name. By all accounts the green was rather severe with a number of plateaus and became known as Russell's Folly. In 1937 Ivo Whitton designed a new 7th hole located on the site where the clubhouse was intended to be built originally, but this idea had been abandoned so this land was spare. There is now a water storage where the old hole used to be.

Russell died in 1961 so was not too active in 1959. I don't know whether he was asked about the Composite Course then or not, somehow I doubt he was. Do I think he ever thought there could be such a thing as a composite course when he was laying out the East? Yes I do, I think it entirely possible he did think of this, but don't know of any evidence.

Here's a bit of what I know of Dick Wilson's involvement in checking out the possibility of using a Composite Course for the 1959 Canada Cup, as he was in Australia working on Metropolitan in early 1959 (from my article about Wilson's Australian trip in GA10):

A Royal Visit
Cornish and Whitten’s bible ‘The Architects of Golf’ (1993) credits Dick Wilson with work at both Royal Melbourne’s East and West courses during his Australian trip. This information came to Ron Whitten from Dick Wilson’s daughter Peggy, whom Ron met back in 1980. Since that time it has become clearer that Wilson did not undertake any work direct for the Club on either of its courses, but that he stopped in to take a look at the proposed Composite Course while he was in Melbourne, most likely at the request of Fred Corcoran, the Tournament Director of the International Golf Association who had just announced that month that Royal Melbourne would be the venue for the Canada Cup in November 1959. As large galleries were anticipated, it was decided to combine twelve West Course holes with six from the East Course so as to create a great test of golf all sited on one property so that no roads needed to be crossed. The Composite Course received its first test during this event, passing with flying colours and many have suggested that the 1959 Canada Cup ushered in the modern era of golf to Australia.

Wilson’s visit to Royal Melbourne to view the Composite Course is confirmed by a contemporary report in ‘Victorian Golf’ magazine from October 1959. In announcing the event, they reported that:
“Three eminently capable critics, the Tournament Director of the I.G.A., Mr Fred Corcoran, America’s wizard golf course architect, Mr. Dick Wilson and our famous Peter Thomson, winner of the British Open four times, equally described the new composite course as “superb” and without any reservation they stated that the 18 holes are the best ever selected for such a top event of Golfdom.”

I was lucky enough to play the Composite Course in competition in the 1984 Australian Open, won by Tom Watson. A thrilling and intimidating experience, especially on the greens. The fastest greens I ever putted on I believe. One extra centimetre in the backswing could be a substantial number of metres difference in the distance your putt went. I recall hitting my iron shot approach to the 6th green around 4 foot pin high right in one of the rounds. And I can distinctly remember visualising a top lip lip out where my ball could and would run off the front of the green with its considerable back to front slope - in the end I dribbled my putt and was happy to get away with a par! Now that's intimidation for you!

Neil

[Chris Kane]

Neil, the greens don't seem as fast anymore!  I presume you've seen most tournaments at RMGC: when was the last time they were really frightening?

[John Kirk]

This is great, Mark.  Thanks for preparing this detailed tour.

[cary lichtenstein]

Since it is a composite course, how can it be the greatest in the world. Maybe the world's best composite course.

Bette and I played each on separate days, severe drought...difficult to appreciate the greatness with the conditions

[Rob Rigg]

Hi Mark,

This is one of the best detailed picture tours I have seen in my time on GCA.

I hope to get to RM one day, but this will help tide me over until that happens!

Mackenzie created some of the most interesting bunkers I have ever seen photos of and, even though there is obviously a water shortage, I think the coloring of the course is fantastic. Those natural hues of the fairways and rough are really offset by the vivid coloring of the vegetation. Spectacular!

[Mark Bourgeois]

Does anyone know if the reservoir they've built left of RMW17 is operational?  That should help with things.

Chris

I don't think there's any doubt the greens aren't as fast.  In 1988 they were regrassed.  Claude Crockford never aerated them; now it's a regular practice.  Of course, slower greens equal fewer mutinies from the pros!

Neil

Excellent story regarding RMW6.  A few years back on my first trip, two members I played with directed me to place a ball back left, just behind the green on that upslope back there.  One walked down to the front-right part of the green with the flag and said, "Putt it like a six-incher."  I did -- and watched it roll off the green!

Great catch on RMW7.  I always screw up that story!  Keep me honest on other attributions and changes such as to RME17 (actually for the 1959 Canada Cup), RMW11, RMW12, and the addition of a left-hand bunker on RMW17. (Okay, there's a placeholder sentence...)  I just know I will forget -- or don't even know in the first place.

The club history description of how the Composite came about mirrors yours.

The Canada Cup does seem to be a watershed in many respects; however, Herbert Warren Wind wrote about Aussie golf prowess a few years before.  It would be interesting to get the yardages from that tournament and compare to today.  Actually, even better would be an architectural history.  The club history is a little thin in that regard, although it does note that (as of its printing) the West saw 9 holes lengthened, 6 shortened and 3 the same, for a net increase of 142 meters.

I've debated buying the 1959 Canada Cup program; it would be neat if it included hole-by-hole descriptions.

One change though appears clear: Wind writes that the Composite 14th (RMW4) was 452 yards.  Now it is listed on the card at 509 yards.

Here by the way are two Sports Illustrated articles Wind wrote on that tournament.  One contains discussion of the crowd-control measures.  Sadly, neither really spends much time on the architecture -- a rarity in Wind's writing I've found.  Usually, he leads with a nice description of the course.
http://vault.sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1133985/1/index.htm
http://vault.sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1134010/index.htm

Wind also wrote a very good two-part series for Sports Illustrated on Australia's rise as a sporting power. You Aussies in particular might enjoy them:
Click here for part 1.
Click here for part 2.

Cary, clearly this is an issue.  Golf Magazine now rates the East and the West.  Earlier this year, Golf Digest Australia had a good discussion of the issues.  They decided to go with the Composite, on the grounds that members do get to play it.  But that doesn't solve the issue of "design intent."

Gotta go!

Mark

[Chris Kane]

Cary, clearly this is an issue.  Golf Magazine now rates the East and the West.  Earlier this year, Golf Digest Australia had a good discussion of the issues.  They decided to go with the Composite, on the grounds that members do get to play it.  But that doesn't solve the issue of "design intent."

I wonder how many of the Golf Digest panellists have actually played the Composite? 

[Mark Bourgeois]

Chris, you're winding them up, aren't you?

Okay, a partial answer to a question posed earlier.  A plan of the West course, dating roughly to within the first 5 years of that course's opening, hangs on the clubhouse wall.  The sketch also includes a few holes from the East located in the main paddock.  Where it seems appropriate, those yardage comparisons are made below.  Here are the available yardages from then and now for the Composite course:

Hole: Then, Now (Yards)
1: 375, 429
2: 465, 480
3: 210, 333
4: 395, 440
5: 175, 176
6: 427, 451
7: N/A (130 vs 148, but holes are completely different)
8: 300, 305
9: 440, 455
10: 420, 476
11: 440, 439
12: 412, 433
13: 418, 354
14: 445, 509
15: 407, 383
16: 278 (a par 4), 201
17: N/A, 558
18: N/A, 443

East-West-NLE-Composite conversion math makes my head hurt, so here are two really cool quotes about the course:

"In the playing of it a good deal of thinking is required and, in the thinking, a certain amount of courage is called upon, together with a cool head and a steady hand.

"The getting-down-in-two prospects have to be continually faced by hardheaded summing-up, and in many instances, loss-cutting.  Few courses on earth will ask you to give a stroke in order to save one.  Few will make you settle for three putts in order to avoid four.  Herein lies the fascination for the player and spectator alike." -- Peter Thomson (1981)

"Well-known Melbourne author and sociologist, John Carroll, has called Royal Melbourne 'one of only two man-made things in Australia of any worldwide architectural significance.'  The other is, of course, the Sydney Opera House." -- Mike Clayton, writing in the World Atlas of Golf (2008)

(The scary thing about that second quote is, Carroll could well be right.)

Mark

[Mark Bourgeois]

The 176-yard 5th hole (RMW5) is, according to Neil Crafter, likely the one hole whose construction Mackenzie supervised.

Mackenzie wrote that the hole was "of a somewhat similar type to the Eden hole at St. Andrews, which new hole is, I think, the best example of artificial work I have ever seen on any golf course, and will certainly be better than any short hole south of the Equator."

About a year ago Tom Doak proposed this hole be included in a "banned for discussion" blacklist for GCA.com, due to the fact it has been pretty thoroughly pawed over.

So here instead is a story about legendary "curator" Claude Crockford, told in an essay written by Graeme Grant in "Golf Architecture, A Worldwide Perspective" (volume 2).

Crockford refused to hollow tyne greens, seeing it as destructive of his smooth putting surfaces.  So whenever a green needed renovation, the turf would be cut into 2-yard strips, rolled up and set aside.  The root mat then would be removed down to free-draining soil.  Fresh soil was brought in and levelled ready for relaying the turf.  The green would be relayed and ready for play just one week later.

All greens received this treatment at least once between sowing in 1929 and 1975, one of Crockford's undoubtedly many secrets for maintaining greens believed to be the truest and fastest in all creation. (By the way, they apparently were brown a fair amount of the time!)

Interestingly, Grant also relates that Crockford "substantially" altered many of the green contours to improve surface drainage.

5th hole, from the tee: spend a little time studying the transition from scrub to bunker to green. Isn't that beautiful?


Here's a view of the major fronting slope, POV the right-hand bunker.  This hole does have some Eden in it:


Mark

[Andrew Bertram]

Thanks Mark

Great Pics.

I was luck to spend 6 years as assistant pro and it certainly is a wonderful place. Over the years i have played the composite maybe 20 times including once as a marker in the Holden Greg Norman Classic when it was at it's firey best. The members really only refer to East and West.

1. The members play the composite on Christmas Day and Good Friday when they lock all the gates on any road and only members and family can get in through security on the main gate.
2. The members play an event called the centenary cup. They play qualifying rounds over the east and west ovewr two saturdays for the men and two wednesdays for the women and the top XX scores qualify for the final over the composite.
3. There is a charity corporate event, or at least there was, that you could pay to enter. The figure $2000 a group rings a bell. It was cancelled this year due the conditions and works on the course but should be held in March 2009.
4. The water storage is up an running, however they still need more rain then we are getting to make a difference to the course. The storm water harvesting unit under 7 east is completed and operational.
2/3rds full at the moment and the course has improved after 2 inches of rain last weekend.

It certainly has a soft spot with me and whatever cpndition it is a joy to play there.


 

[Peter Pallotta]

Mark - thanks for a particularly fine thread. I usually don't participate in the "best of" or ranking threads (both unable and unwilling) -- but I'm very glad I read through this one.  Also, I think the checklist in your 3rd post goes a long way to answering the questions you raised on recent threads (e.g. the 'lists' thread).  Also, you've mentioned a golfing society with only one member, said member apparently (no minutes yet public) spending a year on all things Mackenzie. If true, it shows

Peter 

[Neil_Crafter]

Mark
Here's a West Course plan from the early 1930's (can't find the date for the moment) but it also shows the east Course holes as well, but with no yardage. You can see how the 7th hole played in quite a different direction and location from Ivo Whittons hole. The clubhouse never got built in the location shown and this allowed Whitton to move the hole to the north. As you can see the Mount Misery hole was jammed in tight next to the 6th.

Interestingly the large tongue in the front left bunker on the 5th was a much later addition - 80's or 90s I think. Nice photos and comments.

I wonder if the plan you were looking at in the clubhouse was one of those prepared prior to the course being built, rather than after. I've attached one of the two the club has and this is the one on display that I am aware of.

Chris, I've seen a couple in the flesh but a number on the TV. I think green speeds were at a peak in the 70s and 80s. Clayts would be best placed to comment on this aspect.

[Matthew Rose]

How does one get on? I was thinking of playing one or two sandbelt courses before I moved back to the US next year.

[Andrew Summerell]

There is a charity corporate event, or at least there was, that you could pay to enter. The figure $2000 a group rings a bell.

The cost is about right, although it wouldn't surprise me if it was a tad more in 2009.

[Kevin Pallier]

Mark

Which Composite routing do you prefer ?

Personally - I prefer the one that finishes 3 / 4 / 17 / 18 East ?

It is the only sure 10/10 in Australia for mine. The only truly "great" holes on the paddocks possibly that one misses under such a routing are the 16th on both the West and East courses.

[Paul_Daley]

Mark: greetings.

Thank you for launching into this thread. I'm of the camp that firmly believe there is no such thing as a Composite Course, and that the configuration is unfit for ranking. The property is all East and West Courses; only as a concession to tournament play and the occasional titillation of the members, does it morph into the layout called the Composite Course.

The greens are but a pale imitation of what they once were. The golf world has long since ushered in “soft” pedal spikes, but in the era of metal spikes—which was well before the change (and latter-day reintroduction) to Suttons Mix greens in 2000—your rounds at RMGC (East or West) would leave an indelible mark in your psyche. Upon reaching the first green, you became aware of a impoverished straw-coloured green, which reacted to your spikes as though a microphone was placed under your feet. And the volume was really turned up! Every green, thereafter, seemed to be afflicted by the same malaise. But there was no malaise: this was the way of Royal Melbourne, and it represented good form, knowing you were playing where Lee Trevino in 1974 cited as ‘the biggest joke since Watergate,’ and where Dr Cary Middlecoff putted clean off the 6th green in the 1959 Canada Cup. With each footstep it became a case of: crunch; crunch; crunch. The noise generated by the concrete-like greens—aided by the avoidance of over-watering practices—was jointly experienced by your feet and ears, in concert. That experience, for me, has never been duplicated anywhere, save a few old links centres in the UK. To accompany the straw-coloured greens, the club had extra tall flagsticks and they weighed a “ton”, in spite of being wafer-thin at the bottom. The older one gets, noting the rich green surfaces of today, nostalgia tends to run wild about the glory days of RM.

Just thinking about the West Course layout … it strikes me that nearly every hole is perfectly designed. And most of the East Course, too. Even in its less-than-ideal contemporary presentation, RM is still the place to golf.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()