News:

This discussion group is best enjoyed using Google Chrome, Firefox or Safari.


Jim Nugent

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Royal Melbourne West v Composite
« Reply #25 on: November 17, 2013, 12:59:42 AM »
And you don't hear people lamenting that there are 13 par fours - including eight in a row mid-round - because the holes and course are so damn good.


Does that mean the composite has 3 par 3s and 2 par 5s? 

Scott Warren

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Royal Melbourne West v Composite
« Reply #26 on: November 17, 2013, 01:45:59 AM »
And you don't hear people lamenting that there are 13 par fours - including eight in a row mid-round - because the holes and course are so damn good.


Does that mean the composite has 3 par 3s and 2 par 5s?  

Yes. 3 (5W), 5 (7W) & 14 (16E) are the par threes. 2 (4W) & 15 (17E) are the par fives.

8 (12W) & 16 (2W) are par fives for member play, but fours for the tournament.
« Last Edit: November 17, 2013, 06:27:28 AM by Scott Warren »

James Bennett

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Royal Melbourne West v Composite
« Reply #27 on: November 17, 2013, 06:22:50 AM »
And you don't hear people lamenting that there are 13 par fours - including eight in a row mid-round - because the holes and course are so damn good.


Does that mean the composite has 3 par 3s and 2 par 5s?  

Yes. 3 (5W), 5 (7W) & 14 (16W) are the par threes. 2 (4W) & 15 (17W) are the par fives.

8 (12W) & 16 (2W) are par fives for member play, but fours for the tournament.

Shame on you Scott!  17 W is a fantastic par 4, but plays as the ninth on the current composite.

!7 E on the other hand is a par 5, and is the fifteenth on the current composite.
Bob; its impossible to explain some of the clutter that gets recalled from the attic between my ears. .  (SL Solow)

Scott Warren

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Royal Melbourne West v Composite
« Reply #28 on: November 17, 2013, 06:26:40 AM »
I also called 16E 16W. Let me go back and edit!

Sven Nilsen

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Royal Melbourne West v Composite
« Reply #29 on: March 23, 2014, 12:53:35 PM »
Didn't want to clutter up Mark Saltzman's East Course photo thread with this, so I'll post it here.

The Dec. 4, 1989 edition of The Age had a special section on the Composite Course at Royal Melbourne (in a different order from what has been used lately).  Copied in below are pieces of that section.

Here's the routing with E/W holes used:

1 - 1W
2 - 2W
3 - 1E
4 - 2E
5 - 5W
6 - 6W
7 - 7W
8 - 10W
9 - 11W
10 - 12W
11 - 17W
12 - 18W
13 - 3W
14 - 4W
15 - 3E
16 - 4E
17 - 17E
18 - 18E









« Last Edit: March 23, 2014, 01:07:24 PM by Sven Nilsen »
"As much as we have learned about the history of golf architecture in the last ten plus years, I'm convinced we have only scratched the surface."  A GCA Poster

"There's the golf hole; play it any way you please." Donald Ross

Sven Nilsen

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Royal Melbourne West v Composite
« Reply #30 on: March 23, 2014, 12:55:52 PM »






"As much as we have learned about the history of golf architecture in the last ten plus years, I'm convinced we have only scratched the surface."  A GCA Poster

"There's the golf hole; play it any way you please." Donald Ross

Sven Nilsen

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Royal Melbourne West v Composite
« Reply #31 on: March 23, 2014, 12:57:07 PM »


"As much as we have learned about the history of golf architecture in the last ten plus years, I'm convinced we have only scratched the surface."  A GCA Poster

"There's the golf hole; play it any way you please." Donald Ross

Sven Nilsen

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Royal Melbourne West v Composite
« Reply #32 on: March 23, 2014, 12:58:19 PM »
Some fairly blurry photos from the piece:



"As much as we have learned about the history of golf architecture in the last ten plus years, I'm convinced we have only scratched the surface."  A GCA Poster

"There's the golf hole; play it any way you please." Donald Ross

Sven Nilsen

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Royal Melbourne West v Composite
« Reply #33 on: March 23, 2014, 12:59:39 PM »
And a description of the course from Peter Thomson:

"As much as we have learned about the history of golf architecture in the last ten plus years, I'm convinced we have only scratched the surface."  A GCA Poster

"There's the golf hole; play it any way you please." Donald Ross

Tim_Weiman

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Royal Melbourne West v Composite
« Reply #34 on: March 23, 2014, 02:33:44 PM »
It seems every time I try to figure the Composite out on TV they change the hole numbers.Have they come to some consensus and shouldn't they?Is the walk past hole a disruption or is it just a few extra steps? I realize I am full of questions but one more: is there public transportation for the crowds or a lot off site with a shuttle?Other than the extra holes the property looks surrounded by neighborhoods.

Mike,

There is a solution. Jump on a plane and visit Melbourne! It has to be among the very best cities for golf and the Aussies I've met on my two visits have been very welcoming.

For a long time Royal Melbourne ranked at the top of my list of places I most wanted to see and after finally playing there it is hard to imagine many places I'd rather play on a regular basis. I will say, however, Kingston Heath might have impressed me more. Not because it is better. It isn't. But, KH is amazingly good for such a modest property.

Bottom line: no golf architecture student's travels are complete until seeing Royal Melbourne - both West and the East course.
Tim Weiman

mike_beene

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Royal Melbourne West v Composite
« Reply #35 on: March 24, 2014, 12:08:14 AM »
Every time I drive by DFW and see the big QANTAS  plane sitting there I think about going. The map of the composite should go into the thread with the route maps. Excellent. Thanks.

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back