[James Boon]

I’ve had a copy of “The Evangelist of Golf” by George Bahto for a while but only really dipped in and out of it. Well I’m finally reading it cover to cover and its raised a few queries with regards to great golf holes of Britain that CBM looked to recreate and specifically Brancaster in Norfolk, also known as Royal West Norfolk.

Does anyone know the history of Brancaster?

The book discusses the Golf Illustrated article that listed the best holes of the time. It mentions as one of the great par 4s of the time as “the intimidating greenside bunkering at the 9th at Brancaster”.

Also mentioned is the 1907 issue of Golf Illustrated where an article by CBM mentions a possible ideal 18 holes with the 9th is suggested to be a 350 yard hole “ similar 9th Brancaster”. However, it doesn’t appear a strategy he recreated anywhere???

Is this the 9th we play today? If so, is the greenside bunkering mentioned what is now the semi tidal area short right of the green?

Also, we have CBMs “Short” hole template that is suggested by the 5th at Brancaster. I assume this is now the hole that is played as Brancaster’s 4th, a par 3 of 129 yards, to a raised up green.

Does anyone know what the old layout or routing of the course was, that would allow this hole to come one later? There can’t be much room for a different layout on this narrow strip of land?

Thanks in advance.

Cheers,

James

[Tom_Doak]

James:

I am pretty sure that the 9th at Brancaster of Macdonald's description was today's ninth, and that the short hole [then the fifth] was today's fourth.

I am not sure how the routing of the first three holes was different ... most likely today's second or third holes were originally two holes that were combined together.

However, it is easy to see where they got another hole into the front nine ... it's today's par-3 6th hole.  Originally the front nine would have continued playing east, so you'd have walked from today's fifth green to a shorter tee for today's seventh hole.  But when they wanted to lengthen the course, they found a green site for #6, so to play it you walk across the seventh fairway, play back to the west with a par-3, and then turn around and play the seventh hole from much further back. 

[Rich Goodale]

Yet another fine course designed by an eccentric amateur:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holcombe_Ingleby

The club website claims that little of Mr. Igleby's work has been touched over the past 100+ years.

[Jamie Barber]

It's hard to imagine the 9th having green side bunkering with the marshes...

[George_Bahto]

Isn't the Brancaster 9th, the green with "sleepers" fronting the green (becasue of the incoming tide issue)?

[Pete_Pittock]

Bernard Darwin wrote about the 9th in 'The Golf Courses of the British Isles', mentioning that many compared the guarding bunker comparable to  the 'Maiden' at Sandwich.

[James Boon]

Tom,

Your description of a possible layout before they moved the short hole to the 4th makes sense, as does the origins of the 6th hole. Always thought the 6th was a bit odd, but I can see how it could have come about. Thanks!

Rich,

Thanks for the link. As you say, another ecentric amateur!

Jamie, George and Pete,

This is the one which really gets me? Yes the current 9th is the hole with the sleepers short right, where the tide comes in, but I can't imagine how this relates to the old Maiden at Sandwich that Darwin describes? My first thought before Pete reminded me of the Darwin reference was that there was a bunker short right and this eroded into the tidal area? Maybe there was a large bunker to the left of the green as there are some dunes there, or perhaps the green was moved at some point?

I found a couple of (pretty rubbish) pictures of the 9th...

Cheers,

James

[Jamie Barber]

They must be referring to a different hole; I understood the Maiden at Sandwich is (was) a completely blind par 3 over a large dune.

[Tom MacWood]

Here are some old (and pretty poor) pictures from HG Hutchinson's British Golf Links (1897); the last picture is better from 1913.

[Jamie Barber]

the last photo looks like a bad description to me; describing the tidal area as a bunker. The green site looks pretty much how it is today

[James Boon]

Tom, Thanks for the historic pictures!

Jamie, I agree that the last photo looks like the green site, as it is today.

Maybe Darwin wasn't comparing it with Sandwich's Maiden in the sense of the blind shot, but more the scale of the bunker, and its timber sleepers? Also, maybe it wasn't always a tidal area short of the green, and the tide broke through after some time, or it was always tidal and they tried to make it into a large bunker?

Cheers,

James

[Jamie Barber]

I'm not familiar with the original Maiden at Sandwich but I drive past it every week. I thought it was famous for the blindness, not for any particular bunker? I had always thought the infamous bunker at RSG to be on the 4th (a par 4/5).

You would have thought any attempt to make a bunker there at Brancaster would be pretty futile .. the first high tide and you'd kiss goodbye to the sand

[James Boon]

Jamie,

Yes, I was actually thinking of the bunker on the 4th at Sandwich. My mistake 

I've just dug out Darwin's description of the ninth...

"a hole of which men used to speak with the same reverential awe with which they alluded to the 'Maiden' at Sandwich. Certainly that bunker in front of the green is sufficiently desperate, and to be compelled to approach the hole with a brassey may well inspire fear, but a good drive on a calm day should leave us little more than a firm half iron shot to play, and then we can afford to treat the bunker almost with contempt."

and later...

"we may be just short with our second - a matter of six inches perhaps - and we shall be battering the bunkers unyielding face till our card is shattered and wrecked."

There is also one of Roundtree's paintings of the 9th green and 10th tee, which looks to be the same as we play today? So Darwin's comparison with Sandwich's Maiden was in the sense of the fear felt getting past said obstacle, rather than a direct physical comparison.

Tom's historic photo above and Roundtree's painting indicate that the 9th back in CBM's day and the current one, are one and the same hole? It seems to me that what is now a silted up occasional tidal area, could perhaps of been a more sandy (occasionally tidal?)area, that played as a bunkerl?

Interestingly, Darwin doesn't mention the short 5th (now 4th) at all?

Cheers,

James

[Jamie Barber]

Interesting. I can't wait to get back to Brancaster to give it another try. Has to one of the nicest settings to play golf

[Jamie Barber]

Found a picture of the 9th from when I played in the summer:

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()