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.


Scott Warren

  • Karma: +0/-0
Golf Course Architects' tour of Australia
« on: November 22, 2009, 10:52:24 AM »
With most/all participants now back home and having hopefully slept off their jetlag, I was hoping a few might share their views of what they saw in Australia - the good, the bad and the ugly?

What surprised you in a good way?

What disappointed you about the golf courses?

Which course would you most like to be given the job of tweaking?

What were your favourite 10 holes that you played/saw on the trip?

What other thoughts found their way into your head with the copious amounts of grog that you might be so generous as to share?

Brian Phillips

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf Course Architects' tour of Australia
« Reply #1 on: November 22, 2009, 11:01:19 AM »
Scott,

Here is my ranking of the courses that I played or saw:

1. Kingston Heath (only walked during Masters)
2. Royal Melbourne
3. St. Andrews Beach
4. Metropolitan
5. Royal Sydney
6. New South Wales

I will post pictures and thoughts later this week.
« Last Edit: November 23, 2009, 03:45:27 AM by Brian Phillips »
Bunkers, if they be good bunkers, and bunkers of strong character, refuse to be disregarded, and insist on asserting themselves; they do not mind being avoided, but they decline to be ignored - John Low Concerning Golf

Ian Andrew

Re: Golf Course Architects' tour of Australia
« Reply #2 on: November 22, 2009, 11:48:07 AM »
What surprised you in a good way?

1. The quality of courses in the Sandbelt is outstanding. I don’t thing people realize how good the overall quality of the courses are. I played 8 courses in the Sanbelt and they all had something great to offer.

2. The amount of outstanding short par fours and short par threes. For example, Woodlands has two of the better ones back to back! Every course seemed to have at least one great one.

3. The importance placed on short grass. It's used as much as a defense as an opportunity for recovery. I loved the fact that most entire green sites are surrounded by short grass.

4. That bunkers have short grass cut right up to them. The bunkering is far more in play, particularly along the fairways. Our use of rough around bunkering is “disappointing” in comparison to their architectural style.

What disappointed you about the golf courses?

1. The amount of vegetation and lack of recovery options at places like Metropolitan. In some cases the ground level vegetation is so overpowering that it removes the options of a great hole.

Which course would you most like to be given the job of tweaking?

Royal Melbourne East

1. They need to rethink where they are currently headed.

2. I’m quite convinced that Alex Russell is an architect that doesn’t get enough respect. There are a number of great green sites on that course that are well worthy of study.

What were your favourite 10 holes that you played/saw on the trip?

I’ll stick to one per course… (no particular order)

New South Wales 14th
Woodlands 4th
Royal Melbourne 3rd
Barnbougle Dunes 15th
Commonwealth 9th
Yarra Yarra 5th
St. Andrew’s Beach 2nd
Kingston Heath 3rd
Royal Adelaide 6th
Glenelg 12th

I ended up seeing 17 courses over my travels, so there was a lot to choose from. This is by no means a list of the greatest, since there are other holes I could have listed that may be better. There are six or seven very special holes at Royal Melbourne West alone. The holes I listed are the ones that made me smile or caught me by surprise. They made some sort of personal connection for me and there was something specific that I wanted to draw from each of them.
« Last Edit: November 22, 2009, 05:55:14 PM by Ian Andrew »

James Bennett

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf Course Architects' tour of Australia
« Reply #3 on: November 22, 2009, 04:06:22 PM »

What were your favourite 10 holes that you played/saw on the trip?

I’ll stick to one per course… (no particular order)

Royal Adelaide 5th

I ended up seeing 17 courses over my travels, so there was a lot to choose from. This is by no means a list of the greatest, since there are other holes I could have listed that may be better. There are six or seven very special holes at Royal Melbourne West alone. The holes I listed are the ones that made me smile or caught me by surprise. They made some sort of personal connection for me and there was something specific that I wanted to draw from each of them.


Ian

this was a surprising choice to me.  I assume you do mean the dog-leg right on flattish ground into the corner of the golf-course.  What was it that made some sort of personal connection with this hole?  If I understand that, my opinion of this particular hole might improve.

James B
Bob; its impossible to explain some of the clutter that gets recalled from the attic between my ears. .  (SL Solow)

Ian Andrew

Re: Golf Course Architects' tour of Australia
« Reply #4 on: November 22, 2009, 05:54:55 PM »
Opps, I meant the 6th....  my bad

I had expected the 3rd and 14th and was not disappointed in either, but I really enjoyed the 6th.

I would like that course even more if the sand was all opened up where it once was in the past.
« Last Edit: November 22, 2009, 05:58:20 PM by Ian Andrew »

Bill_McBride

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf Course Architects' tour of Australia
« Reply #5 on: November 22, 2009, 08:20:01 PM »
What surprised you in a good way?


4. That bunkers have short grass cut right up to them. The bunkering is far more in play, particularly along the fairways. Our use of rough around bunkering is “disappointing” in comparison to their architectural style.

HURRAY!!  SOMEBODY GETS IT!!


Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +2/-1
Re: Golf Course Architects' tour of Australia
« Reply #6 on: November 22, 2009, 08:40:06 PM »
Bill:

I get that, too.  But it doesn't work as well on bentgrass fairways as it does for bermudagrass ... the root structure isn't as tough and the edges of the bunker are much more prone to collapse.

Joe Hancock

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf Course Architects' tour of Australia
« Reply #7 on: November 22, 2009, 09:17:24 PM »
Bill:

I get that, too.  But it doesn't work as well on bentgrass fairways as it does for bermudagrass ... the root structure isn't as tough and the edges of the bunker are much more prone to collapse.

I agree, but I wouldn't discourage folks with bentgrass fairways from doing the right thing just because it isn't as easy to do as it might be with some other turf type. Bentgrass, under a drier and leaner regime, can offer enough support to allow close to the edge mowing with competent operators and a super who sticks to details. Kalamazoo CC is doing their fairway cut right to the sand edge without issue....they started doing this under Don Placek's recommendation, along with their fairway widening program which has been a great improvement there, IMO.

Soils, irrigation and fertility have a lot to do with structure and depth of roots, as well as the turf variety. I'd hesitate to write off any type of turf to being incapable.





Joe
" What the hell is the point of architecture and excellence in design if a "clever" set up trumps it all?" Peter Pallotta, June 21, 2016

"People aren't picking a side of the fairway off a tee because of a randomly internally contoured green ."  jeffwarne, February 24, 2017

Emil Weber

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf Course Architects' tour of Australia
« Reply #8 on: November 22, 2009, 11:10:49 PM »
Scott,

Here is my ranking of the courses that I played or saw:

1. Kingston Heath (only walked during Masters)
2. Royal Melbourne
3. St. Andrews Beach
4. Metropoliatan
5. Royal Sydney
6. New South Wales

I will post pictures and thoughts later this week.


New South Wales behind SAB, Metro and Royal Sydney?   ???    ???    ???

Brian Phillips

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf Course Architects' tour of Australia
« Reply #9 on: November 23, 2009, 03:44:16 AM »
New South Wales is probably one of the most overrated golf courses I have ever played in my entire life.  If you took away the views (which I know you can't) it would not get the ratings it gets.  I think the course gets such high ratings just because of the views and where it is located.

There is very little strategy on the course and relies too often on skyline greens to make a hole feel good.  There are too many blind shots without sufficient width on the blindside of the shot to justify the blindness.  

The par 3s on the course are very weak, in fact I would say that the 6th hole probably has the most photographed tee in the world as the tee looks and plays better than the green.

There is not one exceptional Par 5 on the course not even the 5th can classed exceptional apart from the view when you come over the rise, however, I am not playing the view.

I am going to load up pictures of each course and hopefully discuss each course in detail on each separate thread.

Ian Andrew disagrees with me so it will be interesting to discuss with all of you including Ian the merits of this golf course.
« Last Edit: November 23, 2009, 03:57:55 AM by Brian Phillips »
Bunkers, if they be good bunkers, and bunkers of strong character, refuse to be disregarded, and insist on asserting themselves; they do not mind being avoided, but they decline to be ignored - John Low Concerning Golf

Scott Warren

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf Course Architects' tour of Australia
« Reply #10 on: November 23, 2009, 04:01:54 AM »
New South Wales is probably one of the most overrated golf courses I have ever played in my entire life... There is very little strategy on the course...  There are too many blind shots without sufficient width on the blindside of the shot... The par 3s on the course are very weak... There is not one exceptional Par 5 on the course.

That is a lot of hate.

Andrew Summerell

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf Course Architects' tour of Australia
« Reply #11 on: November 23, 2009, 04:42:53 AM »
I think the course gets such high ratings just because of the views and where it is located.

That's extremely insulting to those who have rated it. It suggests you believe they know nothing.

Brian Phillips

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf Course Architects' tour of Australia
« Reply #12 on: November 23, 2009, 05:07:45 AM »
I think the course gets such high ratings just because of the views and where it is located.

That's extremely insulting to those who have rated it. It suggests you believe they know nothing.
Why is that insulting? It is just an opinion...I am not insulting anyone... ::) I might be totally wrong but it is not insulting.  If people cannot have an opinion on here then we may as well just stop coming to this forum.

I just believe the course gets a higher rating because of it's location than it deserves.
« Last Edit: November 23, 2009, 05:16:10 AM by Brian Phillips »
Bunkers, if they be good bunkers, and bunkers of strong character, refuse to be disregarded, and insist on asserting themselves; they do not mind being avoided, but they decline to be ignored - John Low Concerning Golf

Brian Phillips

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf Course Architects' tour of Australia
« Reply #13 on: November 23, 2009, 05:12:15 AM »
New South Wales is probably one of the most overrated golf courses I have ever played in my entire life... There is very little strategy on the course...  There are too many blind shots without sufficient width on the blindside of the shot... The par 3s on the course are very weak... There is not one exceptional Par 5 on the course.

That is a lot of hate.
Hate?  There is no hate in that at all.

Is the statement wrong? Are there any great Par 5s on the course are the Par 3s not weak? Please let me know if you feel I am mistaken (which happens a lot!).  I have been on this forum since it pretty much started and have learned to eat my words a number of times.

Many of the people that played the course that day and the week after would not rank it anywhere as high as most Australians would.
« Last Edit: November 23, 2009, 05:15:46 AM by Brian Phillips »
Bunkers, if they be good bunkers, and bunkers of strong character, refuse to be disregarded, and insist on asserting themselves; they do not mind being avoided, but they decline to be ignored - John Low Concerning Golf

Scott Warren

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf Course Architects' tour of Australia
« Reply #14 on: November 23, 2009, 05:17:55 AM »

Hate?  There is no hate in that at all. Is the statement wrong? Are there any great Par 5s on the course are the Par 3s not weak?

There is no right and wrong in art, but I am interested in seeing a more fleshed out argument than you have presented so far.

Quote
I think I counted about 18 fairway bunkers on the course and over half of them I think are on holes 1 and 18.

And?

Mark Pearce

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf Course Architects' tour of Australia
« Reply #15 on: November 23, 2009, 05:41:33 AM »
Sounds like Brian has hit a nerve here.  Come on, guys.  This is a discussion board.  He's an intelligent and informed guy and a working architect.  He has an opinion, which he has said he's going to explain in more detail with pictures.  He has also acknowledged that at least one other architect on the tour disagrees with him.  We have the prospect of a real discussion about architecture on here and two of the normally saner posters on here are jumping down his throat with words like "hate" and "insulting".

Get a grip.
In June I will be riding the first three stages of this year's Tour de France route for charity.  630km (394 miles) in three days, with 7800m (25,600 feet) of climbing for the William Wates Memorial Trust (https://rideleloop.org/the-charity/) which supports underprivileged young people.

Andrew Summerell

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf Course Architects' tour of Australia
« Reply #16 on: November 23, 2009, 06:24:40 AM »

Why is that insulting? It is just an opinion...I am not insulting anyone... ::) I might be totally wrong but it is not insulting.  If people cannot have an opinion on here then we may as well just stop coming to this forum.

I just believe the course gets a higher rating because of it's location than it deserves.

I’m always concerned when I hear someone say a course only rates well because of its views & location, as I believe them to be intrinsic to the very nature of the course. And I understand what you are saying & agree to an extent. I have always felt the same about Pebble Beach as a course, but the views & location are part of the course.

Regarding the comment about being insulting. It is my hope that people on ranking panels would understand enough about architecture to take all things into consideration. This argument probably falls down at the first hurdle, but I can still hope.  ::)

And I never said you couldn’t have an opinion, just don’t have a different one to mine.  ;)

Mark_F

Re: Golf Course Architects' tour of Australia
« Reply #17 on: November 23, 2009, 06:30:41 AM »
I think the course gets such high ratings just because of the views and where it is located.

That's extremely insulting to those who have rated it. It suggests you believe they know nothing.

Or that they are perhaps swayed by factors other than architecture.  Much like Metro gets such high marks because of its apparent conditioning excellence, and its history as a tournament venue.


Are there any great Par 5s on the course are the Par 3s not weak?

There is no right and wrong in art, but I am interested in seeing a more fleshed out argument than you have presented so far.

Perhaps you could flesh out an argument as to why the par threes and fives at NSW are not weak and great.

Brian,

I look forward to your images and discussion. 



Robin_Hiseman

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf Course Architects' tour of Australia
« Reply #18 on: November 23, 2009, 06:36:13 AM »
Scott

Before I went I have to admit that the merits of the sandbelt courses had sort of passed me by.  I tended to pass over the chapters on Australian golf courses in the various golf course books I've got.  To be honest, they pretty much looked all the same to me.  This trip was the opportunity to prove myself wrong, so to speak.

And so it proved.  I was especially surprised by how diverse the courses were.  NSW suffered in comparison because we were forced to play off the very forward tees, due to their preparations for the Australian Open.  if we were playing from a bit further back I think we would have had a better impression of it.  Nevertheless, I really enjoyed the round and having looked at the old images of the course on Google Earth, the course is definitely getting better.  The two big disappointments were the 6th hole, which wins the award for 'the most disappointing green complex in the best location' and the overgrowth of scrub, which is throttling the landing areas on several holes.

Royal Sydney is just bunkers, bunkers, bunkers.  Really strategic, but brutal on the approach shot.  We had a lot of really tight pins.  It killed me.  Better than I thought it would be though.

Metropolitan was very impressive.  I loved the sharp edged bunkers, which cut all the way into the greens.  Fairways and greens were immaculate.  Definitely the best greens we putted on and the best presented course.  I knew nothing about it before the trip, but it impressed me a lot.  The course felt more like a Florida course though.  Almost tropical in its atmosphere and the noisiest damn course I've ever played.  Those birds just shriek all day long!

After Metropolitan, Brain Phillips and I sneaked off to play St Andrews Beach, with Mick Henderson, who works with Tony Cashmore.  The back story on that place is worth a thread on its own, but for me, it was the best course of the week.  It just ticked all the boxes.  Spacious, exciting and endless variety.  I just don't know how long it will be around though.  We paid $22 for a twilight round and we all had a feeling that this was a course that could easily just disappear again, this time forever.  I hope that isn't the case.  It's an absolute classic and will be my abiding memory of the week.  I could expand on this theme, but maybe on another thread.

Melbourne West was a treat.  I'd done plenty of reading up before we played, so knew what was coming up.  I played really good around there, so got a lot of enjoyment out of the bold, strategic choices offered from the tee.  Hit my best drive of the week on the classic 6th hole, right over all the bunkers and trash on the corner, leaving just a short iron into the green.  I thought the short 3rd was genius.  I drove long, left and had virtually no shot, despite having a completely unhindered access into the flag.  The pin was at the front of the green, so despite an absolutely pefect pitch, I ended up at the very back of the green, which slopes dramatically away from the line of play.  I'll be using that one somewhere.

Kingston Heath looked fabulous, but my strongest feeling coming away from our day at the Australian Masters is that the Melbourne golf fans deserve to have more of the world's best golfers in their  midst more often.  More than 20K people turning out to see Tiger.  The atmosphere was the best I have ever experienced outside of a Ryder Cup.  Oz deserves a World Golf Championship at the very least. 

I finished my week with a game at Huntingdale, which was the weakest course of the week., though it is compared to exalted company.  They really need to change the par 3 15th alongside the lake.  It just stinks the place out.  Got a really nice shirt from the pro shop though.

In order, I would rank the courses I played as:

1.  St. Andrews Beach
2.  Royal Melbourne (West)
3.  Metro
4.  Royal Sydney
5.  NSW
6.  Huntingdale

I'll return to your other questions later Scott and add a couple of photos.
2024: RSt.D; Mill Ride; Milford; Notts; JCB, Jameson Links, Druids Glen, Royal Dublin, Portmarnock, Old Head, Addington, Parkstone, Denham, Thurlestone, Dartmouth, Rustic Canyon, LACC (N), MPCC (Shore), Cal Club, San Fran, Epsom, Casa Serena, Hayling, Co. Sligo, Strandhill, Carne, Cleeve Hill

Scott Warren

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf Course Architects' tour of Australia
« Reply #19 on: November 23, 2009, 06:39:52 AM »
Thanks Robin.

Kevin Pallier

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf Course Architects' tour of Australia
« Reply #20 on: November 23, 2009, 06:48:35 AM »
Brian

I look forward to your elaboration of your thoughts on NSW GC. Can I ask what direction was the wind blowing when you were out there that day just to put things into some context for me ?

Thanks
KP

Scott Warren

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf Course Architects' tour of Australia
« Reply #21 on: November 23, 2009, 09:17:54 AM »
Sounds like Brian has hit a nerve here.  Come on, guys.  This is a discussion board.  He's an intelligent and informed guy and a working architect.  He has an opinion, which he has said he's going to explain in more detail with pictures.  He has also acknowledged that at least one other architect on the tour disagrees with him.  We have the prospect of a real discussion about architecture on here and two of the normally saner posters on here are jumping down his throat with words like "hate" and "insulting".

Get a grip.

To be fair Mark, pick another World Top 40-50 course and imagine a DG member saying about it what Brian did about NSWGC without then explaining why he feels the course is not worthy of its standing.

I'm all for the discussion, but I'm amazed that Brian appeared surprised that he got the response he did. It will be great to hear what specifically he didn't like.

And I'm perplexed about the fairway bunkers comment, which he appears to have edited out after I quoted it.

Opinions make the world go 'round, but when they are as strong as what Brian posted, golf course architect or not, I think they are best presented with some detail.

Ian Andrew

Re: Golf Course Architects' tour of Australia
« Reply #22 on: November 23, 2009, 09:42:55 AM »
New South Wales

I’ll begin with the fives.

I think the fact we played the 5th hole from the wrong tees ruined people’s impression. It was easy to hit over the hill and many people got a chance to hit in a short iron. From the back tee, the shot to the top is much harder. The approach shot from there is incredible and the feeder slope leading into the green is a marvelous option. It is simply one of the great green settings in golf and the fact that it’s understated works very well for me.

The 8th green site is a gem – one of the very best on the course. I loved the up and over nature of the second shot and didn’t see the big deal that many (almost all) others did. I had more than a few arguments over the “blindness” that many didn’t like at NSW – all the shots like the second at 8 are crystal clear since there is a low point in each of the hills.

The 12th is a great tee shot over or onto the prominent ridge with that enormous blowout on the left. Once again we were too far up to fully appreciate the landing area was on top of the ridge and many blew it by – and into the sandy area behind. The second shot from further back had to deal with the open areas of grass on the second. I found the green site to be real tricky with the slopes around the green and the subtle angle. I thought the hole was solid.

The 18th routing is fine, off the dune and up under the clubhouse. The view is out to Sydney and the undulations in the second landing are pretty interesting. I agree that the excess of bunkering and the rebuilt green seems a bit out of context.

Jeff_Brauer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golf Course Architects' tour of Australia
« Reply #23 on: November 23, 2009, 09:47:49 AM »
FWIW re Brian's opinion of NSW, when I was there years ago, that seemed to be the prevailing opinion among the locals, too, that NSW is overrated for its setting, but isn't that strong a golf course, and it does have some bad holes.
Jeff Brauer, ASGCA Director of Outreach

Ian Andrew

Re: Golf Course Architects' tour of Australia
« Reply #24 on: November 23, 2009, 10:04:19 AM »
Scott and Andrew,

One of the more enjoyable parts of the trip for me was finally meeting Brian.

He has strong opinions, but is a hell of a lot of fun because he definitely is willing to take a contrary stance and defend it. He and I almost completely disagreed on everything, but that made it more fun when we were discussing architecture.

He loved Royal Sydney – I did not. He couldn’t understand the fuss about NSW – I thought it was one of the best I saw. That’s fun.

One thing I learnt from this trip was how differing the opinions were on the courses from each of the architects. I’m one of the few who really loved NSW and one of the few who didn’t rave about Metro. We all like different things, and I think that’s good for architecture.


Brian, Forrest and I went and joined a few of the GCA Melbourne guys at the Stokehouse on Wednesday. We had an excellent night - thank you Mathew – and Mr. Philips spent a good portion f the time explaining his ideas on Sydney and NSW. While there was a lot on incredulity from a couple the discussions were fun. I think it helps you think or don’t like something because you need to defend your position.

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back