Jason, George & Gary
I feel strongly about selecting the site of a golf course. As for Kinsbarns, that is a slightly different story to The Castle.
A golf course in the challenge and enjoyment it offers is more than just the some of its parts. It is not just a question of we have the money (well once we did), we have the technology and we can do just about what we want to the land. That for me is no criteria for selecting the plot in the first place. I feel we need to be far more selective.
Golf was and is a links game that has migrated inland because of demand. The early designers trying to keep true to the original concept, which has slowly been eroded away. However IMHO that does not mean we should tinker with the game nor should we build courses that do not blend with the rest of the countryside. The game is golf and to play golf we should be playing the land, not dressing it up to be what we think it should be, a Disneyland out in the woods or wilderness just because we have the technology or because some want it and are willing to throw bucket of money at it. Let’s not forget it is a Golf Course we are after, for some that means Nature and natural, well in these modern times as close to natural as we can.
As for travelling, that is down to the individual, if you want to play on artificial courses that look out of place with its surrounding, that’s your choice and please do so. However, those of us who believe golf is an old game played on ‘land fit for purpose’ also have the right to our opinions. I see no need to overcomplicate the design or construction just because we can, I do not believe in paying through the nose to build a golf course and I certainly do not want to play on the golfing equivalent of Disneyland. I will say this that I am lucky that the climate offers a great mix of courses here in GB&I. I am and can indulge myself with a good choice of links courses. Nor do I mind travelling to them, be they 300-400 miles away as IMHO they are well worth the effort.
A moment perhaps to explain and to look at my game. Its one of walking or not using distance books, marker or electronic aids. It honest and simple golf which is about the individual challenge of playing a course without outside help in either getting to the ball or using a distance aid to confuse my own inbuilt or God given senses. It is I, the golfer against the course, my score, skill or entertainment being tested against myself, Nature or what the designers can throw at me – that is the game of golf. That is why you can play the same course time and time again, yet still looking forward to returning. So I prefer my courses to have some honesty in them, you may just be content with any course, well good for you.
I suppose I view it in a similar manner to say cloning (of courses), of constantly diluting the original ideas of the game or course to a state along the lines of homeopathy, that very little of the original spirit or essence is left. Nevertheless, then we all have a choice and I intend while I can and am fortunate to have the courses, to pursue the game in the way it was taught to me.
I feel that the American Indians may understand my comments in that they have a feeling for the land, of not owning it but taking care of it for future generations. Are we taken care of the land when we strip it bear, then rebuild it with all its fake contours, mounds and pond/lakes and I presume its imported grass etc. What are you left with, the natural landscape, no as it has be forever changed, but you are playing the bulldozer course & not God’s - if you follow my drift.
For those who enjoy the Castle Course, I am pleased for you, but I still do not see a golf course built on land fit for purpose, just an overspill course to make money on the back of the name of St Andrews. A very poor reason to build a course there in the first place IMHO.
But then as I have said that is my opinion.
Melvyn
PS As for what was there before, lets just say it did not portray the image we get today when we observe the modern Castle Course
