Mark
In answer to your two questions
1) No never played it. But spent sometime over numerous visits to St Andrews checking out the course prior to its opening. My mood changed from disbelief when I heard a course was to be built on the site, to anger when I saw the destruction of the land laid out before me. It was one of the reasons why I have become so concerned about selecting the right site for a golf course, my Land Fit For Purpose posts.
I have no opinion on the 5th or 6th so called St Andrews courses. They represent that part of the modern game which seems dead from the neck upwards. What can one say about soulless courses apart from identifying their presence.
The Links Trust seem to have forgotten the quality of the first four courses, perhaps it their proximity to the town or each other, but they do, I believe shout ‘Golf Course’, something the last three totally fail to do. Perhaps expectations were high regards the hype around the new 7th course but to see the utter destruction of the land (albeit farmland) prior to construction all these fake hills and dells. Do the contours flow to the adjoining land, no, suddenly you are back into farm land. Because some can build a helter skelter course on flat , perhaps slightly sloping to the sea farm land does not mean that it’s a good course. Some have already stated that they like the course due to its views and undulations, yet the whole course is a total fake, there is nothing there that inspired the course being place there or in its design – they destroyed everything in the construction process. The Home of Golf and all they could come up with is fake after fake. Do not know about you Mark but that’s part of my family and St Andrews heritage being washed down the plug hole.
My early fear was that The Links Trust were considering calling it after Old Tom due to the pending Centenary of his Death in 2008, thank God they called it the Castle.
2) What makes you think a 7th Course was needed let alone required, after all have we not got enough course in this region. I feel that there was no need for another course, but others know better so they throw millions of public money at a site, Instead of trying to keep in line with the Home of Golf courses we are given this Disneyland course that still need work to put it right. Say’s a lot for Scottish Golf and the Home of Golf, seems that we desperately need Old Tom back to sprinkle his magic – a new course when one was not needed is bad enough but to produce a total fake (not reproduction but 100% fake) in the heart of the Home of Golf and you wonder why I am unhappy. The Centre of the Golfing Worlds and the Links Trust commission a fake course on unsuitable land outside of town – what sort of message is that Mark to send to the world.
Hope I have answered your questions. There is one thing that has come out of the Castle Course and that is the question should we allow our natural landscape to be destroyed in this way. I understand its mainly for drainage but there must be a better way, sooner or later the environmental and financial pressures may force a total rethink on our construction methods. Perhaps my comments Land Fit For Purpose is not after all dead and buried and may persuade clients to be more selective in future.
Melvyn