What if Donald Ross.......

[Niall C]

I have been a member of this site for the last 5 or 6 months or so and it has been interesting reading even though on a lot of the US based topics I have had nothing really to add. Of most interest to me have been the threads on Scotland and from them it seems clear to me that 3 courses seem to be appreciated more than others, namely the Old Course, Cruden Bay and Royal Dornoch.

I'm not suggesting for one second that any of these courses don't provide good golf, but I am puzzled as to why visitors from overseas rate them quite so highly.

I appreciate that the Old Course has a special place in the history of the game as well as golf course architecture, but if you asked the locals many would tell you its only the 3rd best course in St Andrews never mind Scotland.

Cruden Bay - has some good golf, especially the opening stretch, but the run of blind holes starting with the par 5 with the green behind the sand dune make it no better than good holiday golf and certainly not a great course (IMHO).

Dornoch - good course but is it any better than nearby Nairn and a host of others ? Is it the Donald Ross connection which makes this a must play for Americans in particular ? What if he Donald Ross had no connection would it be so highly rated ?

Interested to hear everyones views, not only why they should be (or maybe shouldn't be) highly rated, and how they got their rating in the first place.

Niall

[Rich Goodale]

This is a good post, Niall.

Grudging support is given here to places like Carnoustie, Muirfield, Troon and Turnberry, which are probably the four most solid golf courses in Scotland, but when it comes to love, none of these places seems to register on this tough love crowd.  IMO, the worst holes of any of those four courses would be better than average holes of courses like Cruden Bay and North Berwick and Prestwick, but we revere the latter.  As for St. Andrews, you are right that most Fife golfers do not rate the Old Course as much more than an overpriced museum, and they are somewhat right, but what a museum!  As for Dornoch, some of the earlier visitors were influenced by Ross, but these days the high world ranking and overall love expressed by others are more important in its attraction.  Which is not to say that it is necessarily better than, say, Nairn.  I do think so, but some people I respect do not.

I've tried to articulate why I feel most of the above, on other threads, but one of the things that plagues this site is the lack of intelligent debate when we get down to specifics.  There is too much of the "Pebble sucks!  Cypress rules!" "Why?"  "Just because!" sort of dialogue on this forum, and it should be cryit doon, but ain't.

Getting to the point, without the Ross connection, Dornoch possibly would be lower rated because without Ross, Wind and Dye might not have come and then Crenshaw and Watson and Tatum follow, etc. etc.  I do think, however, that it does stand up to comparison with the best and over its inferiors.  I am biased, of course, but wold be pleased to try to say why, again.

Rich

[Carl Johnson]

Niall,

Here's my perspective.  I like to think I'm an average US tourist golfer.  First, I don't really believe in ranking or rating couses.  Who am I to say what the "best" courses are, or why one course is better than the other.  However, I do have my personal likes and dislikes, the courses I've enjoyed and those I haven't (among the 25 or so Scottish courses I've played), and I share my opinions with others.

I finally got on the Old Course two years ago, and am glad I did.  Is it a great course?  I don't know.  We had fun, but I've done it and I wouldn't go back.  Now I know, first hand, what it's about.  I'm certain it must be an great course to the sophisticated golfer, but I like to see where I'm going, for the most part.   I also played the New and the Jubilee.  I liked the latter a lot and would play it again, but not the New.  Niall, which St. Andrews courses would the locals rank as 1 and 2, with the Old being third, in your view?

Cruden Bay.  I've played it twice and loved it both times.  Why?  The landscape and the course, combined.  We've got nothing remotely like that golf course landscape it the States (that I know of).  Maybe that's the turn-on.  It  was just lots of fun.  You're probably right.  It's just a holiday course.  But I'll take the holiday.  It tested me plenty, but not in an overwhelming way.  What would the scratch golfer think of the course?  You'll have to go to someone else for that opinion.

Royal Dornoch.  We played one round on Nairn one day and then two on Dornoch the next.  I couldn't play Dornoch "every day," but I could Nairn.  Dornoch was too difficult for me (on a very windy day).  Yet, if you pressed me, I'd have to say I thought Dornoch to be a far superior course, and I'd definitely like to play it again.  The difference being, again, the course combined with the land.  The Ross connection at Dornoch was marginal for me, even though I belong to a Ross course club here at home.  It's not like he was the "architect" at Dornoch.  On the other hand, our group did have fun posing for a photo in front of Ross's family home.

Prestwick and Turnberry, the latter possibly my favorite Scottish course (of the one's I've played, obviously) are two other courses at the top of my list.  Carnoustie, Muirfield and Royal Troon, the latter allowed exceptions for some holes, are at the bottom (the bottom of a list of very fine, well-regarded courses, mind you).

The common thread that distinguishes my personal favorites from the others is the land.  My favorites are all so very different from my experience in the States, while the less favorites are not.  Does this make my favorites better courses?  Well, maybe not in the pure golf sense, whatever that is?  I do know, however, which courses I'll recommend my US friends play when they visit Scotland.  For me it's not so much as a "ratings" issue as a "have fun golfing issue."  Maybe that's what some of us Yanks translate into "best."

[Niall C]

Rich/Carl,

Many thanks for your replies guys. From what I gather from both of you its about the fun element rather than what might be a "better" course.

Rich - very well put if I may say. Interesting comment on Dye etc visiting Dornoch. Did that play a big part in Dornoch getting its reputation ?

Carl - I hear what you say about the landscape being an attraction. I remember the first time I played Carnoustie and being taken aback at how flat a lot of it is. In truth it didn't do a lot for me but now I've played it 4 or 5 times I love it as a golf course.

On St Andrews, I don't know that there is a clear consensus on which course is best. There will still be some who will opt for the Old but most would definitely put it behind New/Jubilee. As for the Eden, there is probably a consensus on it having 14 of the best holes at St Andrews and 4 of the worst. The new holes would merely be OK on an average inland course but are totally out of keeping with a links. Those 4 holes, which are the new ones, are such a let down that I think they must put a lot of people off playing the course.

It was Donald Steel who designed the new holes and while you don't know if he was hampered by budget they certainly are a let down. Given how much the links trust spent at the Castle Course, I reckon they could get another star attraction by spending a fraction of that cost in redesigning/rebuilding these holes. 

Niall

[Rich Goodale]

Niall

When Herbert Warren Wind visited Dornoch in 1964 and wrote his influential article "North to the Links of Dornoch," the course was well regarded in Scotland (Sam MacKinlay the golf writer gave it his highest ranking--with St. Andrews, Turnberry and Muirfield) but disparaged by the English mafia that ran the R&A and hardly known in America.  The days of the Wethered's and Holderness's summering in the houses to the right of the first fairway each year was long gone, and other than Michael Murphy and Bing Crosby, few colonials even thought of travelling to Scotland to play golf.

Dye preceded Wind in visiting the links and clearly was influenced by it in his early design career and Wind's article brought Crenshaw who brought Watson and Tatum.  W&T's visit in 1981 (which I witnessed) led to some highly positive articles in Golf Digest, Golf Journal, SI, etc. which in turn led to a massive increase in American visitors, who brought back more glowing reports, etc. etc.

Interesting point about the Eden.  Despite the awkward holes I still love that course.  I do think that they could improve them, but what is needed is cosmetic rather than cosmic, and would probably have to include the pond at the end of the course, although less obtrusively than at present.  The new holes fit the scale if not the character of the old ones.  The last thing that is needed are some Castle type holes which might be "better" from a modern gca point of view, but out of both scale and character of what Colt built.

Cheers

Rich

[Mark Bourgeois]

Niall, let's hear it: the case for the New over the Old.  More curious to hear the criteria and thought process -- from what perspectives is the New a better course -- than a head-to-head comparison.

Thanks,
Mark

[Philippe Binette]

Dornoch is fantastic, Donald Ross or not... Nairn  is not close as far as quality, Nairn is a nice course but not to the level of Dornoch

The Old Course, well, if you come of the bus and step on the first tee play it once and leave, you will never understand the genius of the place

Cruden Bay is fun, if you are of the greens in regulation vision of the game, you won't like it

[Niall C]

Niall, let's hear it: the case for the New over the Old.  More curious to hear the criteria and thought process -- from what perspectives is the New a better course -- than a head-to-head comparison.

Thanks,
Mark

Mark,

I could chicken out this one and say that I was referring to popular opinion and not necessarily expressing my own thoughts but that would just be cowardly.

I can't say I know either course well enought to give a hole by hole comparison. I've only played the Old once, although I have walked it with the head greenkeeper another time, and have watched various championships on it over the years. The New (and indeed Jubilee) I've played half a dozen times over the last ten years, so I'm not going to even try and compare them in any detail.

What I would say is that the New/Jubilee are more conventional, which in itself doesn't make them better, but in being more conventional they don't have the nothing holes that the Old has ie 9th and 10th of the top of my head and the 8th isn't that exciting a par 3 come to think of it (that should get a few comments  .

The other thing that gets the Old Course a black mark is that it is so wilfully blind. Now as you know, we like a good blind hole in Scotland but if you didn't know the course and didn't have a caddy, you would get pissed off pretty quickly at the number of blind shots. All of the above comments are my ideas and not necessarily the views of the Scottish golfers I referred to as when speaking to fellow golfers in Scotland you don't generally talk in design specifics but tend to describe courses in terms of whether they are "good", "bad", "tough" etc.  

Anyway I think I've said enough there to get myself into trouble so I'll leave it to others to agree or disagree on that.

Rich - you could probably take four holes from the Castle (haven't played it but going from reviews/pictures) and there bound to be more in character than whats there. Kingsbarns is probably a better example as the land was similiar to the four new at Eden prior to construction.

Like you, I love the course despite those holes. Just imagine what it could be with 4 new holes done properly.

Niall

[Niall C]

Dornoch is fantastic, Donald Ross or not... Nairn  is not close as far as quality, Nairn is a nice course but not to the level of Dornoch

The Old Course, well, if you come of the bus and step on the first tee play it once and leave, you will never understand the genius of the place

Cruden Bay is fun, if you are of the greens in regulation vision of the game, you won't like it

Philippe,

But why these 3 courses in particular ? Not saying there bad courses, on the contrary, but why are they top of the must play list ahead of other courses ?

Dornoch - I disagree on comparison to Nairn, but there are loads of other courses which I could have used eg Western Gailes, Prestwick St Nicholas, Royal Aberdeen etc. The question is why Dornoch

Cruden Bay - same as above, there are a number of other courses which provide good fun without doing your brains in eg Machrihanish etc

Old Course - I've played the courses up there and stayed enough in the town, and indeed being Scottish I can't help but be aware of the significance and history of the Old Course but what I'm talking about is the quality of it as a course ignoring all the rest of it.

Niall

[Philippe Binette]

Why those courses are on top of the lists: the experience...

The Old Course: magic happens every time you step on that course
Dornoch : feeling of remoteness
Cruden Bay: feeling of discovery

but other courses should be on the list, you're right

Machrihanish: feeling of adventure
North Berwick: wilderness
Prestwick: old school

Scotland is full of great courses, but some have uniqueness in them... Nairn is really good as I said, but I didn't feel it was as unique... the 5 courses above have unique shots or holes that you rarely see anywhere else. Nairn is relatively straightforward (relative for Scotland), and less emotionaly intense. And some emotional intensity creates memory people talk more about those courses maybe.