News:

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


Scott Warren

  • Karma: +0/-0
Royal Melbourne (East) - golf's 'A Tale of Two Cities'
« on: April 26, 2011, 03:03:13 AM »

Its bunkering creating deception and marrying the prepared surface in with the native vegetation, the 12th at Royal Melbourne (East) is one of the course's standout holes.

I find it interesting that when I have come across two-course clubs in my travels - The Berkshire, Royal Dornoch, Burnham & Berrow - the distinction is often that the second course (Blue, Struie and Channel, respectively) tends to be more a more narrow, demanding driving course with smaller, more contoured greens.

The almost inevitible outcome of that is that those courses, while assuming the role of little brother, are the more difficult of the two courses on the property.

That formula seems present at Royal Melbourne almost to the letter, and just as in two of the three above examples, the East is unquestionably the lesser of the two courses (The Berkshire's Blue vs Red is a much more hard-fought debate).

Another interesting factor here is the lack of fairway bunkering - only the the 1st, 7th, 8th, 10th and 14th holes have sand as a driving hazard - which is at odds with the West, where the bunkering dominates the driving strategy on many of the holes.

Built on the same parcel of land as the lion's share of the West course, the quality of the opening four holes in relation to most of what's to come goes a long way to cementing my belief that at the root of great golf design more often than not is the land upon which the holes were built.

I'd select 1-4, 10-12 and 16 as the standouts of the course, and I doubt it is a coincidence that they occupy the best of the land - gently undulating and laced with native heath.

Among that sample are:

The best of the par threes - The 16th pips the attractive 4th in my view, largely on the strength of the front and back bunkers that bite into the green, creating a slight "H" shape that, coupled with the slope, makes placing your ball in the correct quadrant of the creen crucial. What's more, from a slightly elevated tee the view of the spectacular bunkering is one of the best on the course.


Above: The 4th. Below: The 16th.



The approach to the 1st.

The best of the short par fours - the 1st offers a blind tee shot to a downhill fairway allowing many to drive within 60m of the green, from where a delicate pitch to a steep green flanked by bunkers and with OOB long is likely to be more difficult than you imagined, especially on the second shot of the round.

The best of the long par fours - the 2nd asks for an accurate cut to match the shape of the narrow fairway, before the land climbs to a green set high above the fairway and best approached from the hard-to-access inside of the dogleg, guarded by thick native vegetation.


For those unable to get home in two, the dilemma and challenge of the lay-up at the 10th is wonderful.

The best of the par fives - after the slight let-down of the 6th through 9th holes, the 10th is masterful for its bold off-camber drive and the positioning of the cross bunkers in the lay-up zone that offer an infinitely easier third shot to the golfer who can position his ball over them and to the left, which is also likely to be the player who has successfully taken on the risk of driving down the right-hand side.

That's not to say that the holes not contained in the choice stretches listed above don't have their appeal.

The subtle front-to-back green on the short par four 5th demands precision and rewards the player who can spin the ball with a half wedge or wisely place his drive far enough back that a full shot can be played. It asks many of the same questions posed by the famous 3rd on the West course, complete with a semi-blind drive over a gentle crest.

The 13th is one of the best examples I've seen of what seems to be a common way to make use of uninteresting land on the Melbourne Sandbelt and London Heathland - a short iron par three to a small, undulating and fiercely-defended green (off the top of my head I can think of this hole, the 13th at Royal Melbourne (West), 10th at Kingston Heath, 4th and 15th at Yarra Yarra, 7th at Peninsula (North) 4th at The Berkshire (Blue), 13th at Swinley Forest, 16th at Woking, 16th at West Sussex, 10th at Worplesdon, 10th at New Zealand and 2nd at Hankley Common that all fit the description).

The 18th is a brutal finisher, especially into the wind where most will have to be content with finding the sand-ringed green in three shots.


Approaches to the 18th, likely to be played with at least a mid iron, must be precise.

What's most regrettable about Royal Melbourne (East) is the overkill of dogleg right holes and the out of character remodelling at the 6th, 7th and 15th holes, which renders the middle stretch of each nine an unwelcome breather from the great golf.

While the 6th and 7th holes are at least functional, they don't belong on this golf course.

The 6th green has unnatural lumps at he back where the previous green, just 150m away, shows the beauty and effectiveness of a sleek, simple slope in running the ball away and creating doubt in the golfer's mind.


The simplicity of the run-off at the back of the 5th green.

The 7th features no less than five fairway bunkers on a course almost devoid of them and if that wasn't enough, they're cut into overly-busy shapes that are at odds with the beautiful bunkering elsewhere on the course.


The busy nest of bunkers down the right of the 7th.

Trying to sum Royal Melbourne (East) up, I'm reminded of the opening paragraph of Charles Dickens' A Tale of Two Cities: "It was the best of times, it was the worst of times... some of its noisiest authorities insisted on its being received, for good or for evil, in the superlative degree of comparison only."

This is unquestionably a wonderful golf course with a selection of all-world holes and a strong routing, which perhaps makes the regrettable features all the more unwelcome in the inevitable comparison with what they were created to complement.
« Last Edit: April 26, 2011, 03:05:04 AM by Scott Warren »

Mark_F

Re: Royal Melbourne (East) - golf's 'A Tale of Two Cities'
« Reply #1 on: April 26, 2011, 06:11:06 AM »
The subtle front-to-back green on the short par four 5th demands precision and rewards the player who can spin the ball with a half wedge or wisely place his drive far enough back that a full shot can be played. It asks many of the same questions posed by the famous 3rd on the West course, complete with a semi-blind drive over a gentle crest.


Nice post, Scott.

Surprised you think the 1st is the best short four there - 5 has it covered easily, as does 11.  Five is probably a more difficult hole now with technology, and if an iron is used from the tee, the side slope in the fairway still exerts the same influence driver did thirty years ago.

Didn't everyone make a five here downwind? :)  11 has a very tight line over the hill for the ideal line, so everyone goes left, from where the second can be a nightmare. I don't think the first holds anywhere near the terrors of the other two.

As Shane said elsewhere, it's a pity Hawtree has been allowed onto the grounds - he screwed up the 15th, which might have been the best.

I would prefer the Australian Government give refuge to Osama Bin Laden than let Martin Hawtree enter this country again.
« Last Edit: April 26, 2011, 06:26:01 AM by Mark Ferguson »

Scott Warren

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Royal Melbourne (East) - golf's 'A Tale of Two Cities'
« Reply #2 on: April 26, 2011, 07:43:32 AM »
Some good points, Mark.

The fight for best short four in my mind is close between 1 and 5. I liked 11, especially the green, but I thought the drive was a bit awkward and the fairway and approach offered less discomfort than 1 or 5, and that discomfort caused by the land is something I really value in the approach on a short four (eg. 8 at Pine Valley, 6 at Deal, 3 at Swinley, 3 at Fishers Is).

Did we all make five? I thought I just held the back left of the green and made a four? I might have to check my scorecard!

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +1/-1
Re: Royal Melbourne (East) - golf's 'A Tale of Two Cities'
« Reply #3 on: April 26, 2011, 07:48:56 AM »
Scott:

They are actually going to switch out #4 East from the Composite Course for the President's Cup this year, and replace it with #16 East.  The fourth is a bigger hole, but the tee back in the corner left no room for galleries to get around the third green or fourth tee, so they've decided to walk around #4 instead of #16 now.

Scott Warren

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Royal Melbourne (East) - golf's 'A Tale of Two Cities'
« Reply #4 on: April 26, 2011, 07:59:53 AM »
I heard that, Tom. Interesting the way a matchplay event has different logistical demands to strokeplay (due to the galleries following a smaller concentration of play) and pretty cool how the Composite routing is more elastic to those demands than the set routing of a standalone course would be.

Mark_F

Re: Royal Melbourne (East) - golf's 'A Tale of Two Cities'
« Reply #5 on: April 26, 2011, 08:16:52 AM »
... and that discomfort caused by the land is something I really value in the approach on a short four (eg. 8 at Pine Valley, 6 at Deal, 3 at Swinley, 3 at Fishers Is).

Scott,

Good point.  That's why KH 3 is at the bottom of the pile in Melbourne. ;D

Did we all make five? I thought I just held the back left of the green and made a four? I might have to check my scorecard!

I'm fairly sure you did, but if you didn't, I might have made six, which means we all averaged five anyway.

Brett_Morrissy

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Royal Melbourne (East) - golf's 'A Tale of Two Cities'
« Reply #6 on: April 26, 2011, 09:18:58 AM »
Scott, educational post - thank you, I only played east recently - in pouring rain and a charity day, played poorly and generally didn't enjoy the round, which usually makes it a challenge to enjoy the architecture sometimes, and also appreciate the strategy - so I left East recognizing that there were some great holes( particularly the shorter holes)but was left wondering why I was disappointed. Condition wasn't great at the time, but I could see past that, so I now have better balanced view - thanks for the post.

Are you going to do west?
@theflatsticker

Scott Warren

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Royal Melbourne (East) - golf's 'A Tale of Two Cities'
« Reply #7 on: April 26, 2011, 09:41:15 AM »
I am, Brett. Hopefully in less time than it took me to get around to the East!

I was lucky that I played the East before I played the West, so all my on course observations and feelings were unaffected by comparisons to the West, which I think helped me absorb it simply for what it was in itself, then the ability to compare came later.

The trouble with leaving it this long is I find I tend to forget the little things that can provide the most interesting talking points. Usually the camera does the remembering for me, but the camera I took on this trip was a real piece of shit, so a lot of the pics are out of focus!

Kevin Pallier

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Royal Melbourne (East) - golf's 'A Tale of Two Cities'
« Reply #8 on: April 26, 2011, 09:56:20 AM »
Thanks for your thoughts and pics Scott.

I'm not a massive fan of #11 or #5 and much prefer the offset green and false front + fallaways associated with #1.

Patrick Kiser

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Royal Melbourne (East) - golf's 'A Tale of Two Cities'
« Reply #9 on: April 26, 2011, 10:11:27 AM »
The East really surprised me.  I mean I had heard it was pretty good, but I didn't realize how good.

I saw some ground contours leading into greens of excellent quality.

Could play this course everyday.

It was clear though more TLC was going into the West.  Even the fellow in the pro shop said he had played the course ... once!  In all his years there, just once.

An underrated course if I ever saw one.  You guys are spoiled down there...
“One natural hazard, however, which is more
or less of a nuisance, is water. Water hazards
absolutely prohibit the recovery shot, perhaps
the best shot in the game.” —William Flynn, golf
course architect

Mark Chaplin

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Royal Melbourne (East) - golf's 'A Tale of Two Cities'
« Reply #10 on: April 26, 2011, 10:17:03 AM »
Brett how long ago did you play? The East was in fabulous condition four weeks ago.

Tom thoughts on playing 1st tee East to 8th green West? It appears to work better on the Presidents Cup course used as a member event, as you cannot play the approach until the 2nd tee is clear. Obviously not a problem during the PC
Cave Nil Vino

Kyle Henderson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Royal Melbourne (East) - golf's 'A Tale of Two Cities'
« Reply #11 on: April 26, 2011, 11:18:22 AM »
Scott:

They are actually going to switch out #4 East from the Composite Course for the President's Cup this year, and replace it with #16 East.  The fourth is a bigger hole, but the tee back in the corner left no room for galleries to get around the third green or fourth tee, so they've decided to walk around #4 instead of #16 now.

I heard this as well.

Frankly, I think they should play both holes in lieu of simply walking past one of them. Why not 19-hole matches?
"I always knew terrorists hated us for our freedom. Now they love us for our bondage." -- Stephen T. Colbert discusses the popularity of '50 Shades of Grey' at Gitmo

Peter Pallotta

Re: Royal Melbourne (East) - golf's 'A Tale of Two Cities'
« Reply #12 on: April 26, 2011, 11:49:22 AM »
Thanks as always, Scott.

The sky there seems as much part of the overall (and unified) aesthetic as the turf and the natural vegetation.  It seems to be a site-specific quality that helps the eye make sense of the scale of the design (and does so in a more subtle and to my eye more lovely way than do the mountains on a Stanley Thompson course).

Peter

jonathan_becker

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Royal Melbourne (East) - golf's 'A Tale of Two Cities'
« Reply #13 on: April 26, 2011, 12:33:16 PM »
Thanks for the photos and your thoughts, Scott.  I look forward to the West as well.

Is the middle part of the green on 16 pinnable or is it only left side or right side?

Scott Warren

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Royal Melbourne (East) - golf's 'A Tale of Two Cities'
« Reply #14 on: April 26, 2011, 05:51:15 PM »
The whole thing is pinnable, JB. Tilts quite steeply back to front.

I'll post an aerial later when I'm not on my phone.

David Kelly

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Royal Melbourne (East) - golf's 'A Tale of Two Cities'
« Reply #15 on: April 26, 2011, 06:22:21 PM »
... and that discomfort caused by the land is something I really value in the approach on a short four (eg. 8 at Pine Valley, 6 at Deal, 3 at Swinley, 3 at Fishers Is).

Scott,

Good point.  That's why KH 3 is at the bottom of the pile in Melbourne. ;D

Did we all make five? I thought I just held the back left of the green and made a four? I might have to check my scorecard!

I'm fairly sure you did, but if you didn't, I might have made six, which means we all averaged five anyway.

I do well just to remember the holes and if I do remember them my own scores come next.  To remember what our group collectively shot is way too much for me.

Having said that, if we averaged a 5 as a group then JM must have had an 8 because I distinctly remember holing it out from the fairway. Or not.

Put me down as liking the 5th as the best short par 4 on the East.  I thought it called for the most exacting shot on the approach. 
« Last Edit: April 26, 2011, 06:25:49 PM by David Kelly »
"Whatever in creation exists without my knowledge exists without my consent." - Judge Holden, Blood Meridian.

Mark Bourgeois

Re: Royal Melbourne (East) - golf's 'A Tale of Two Cities'
« Reply #16 on: April 26, 2011, 06:56:10 PM »
Great writeup, Scott. Jonathan, the entire green most certainly is pinnable; however, the perimeter is where the greatest challenge (surprise) lies. The left wing is a dastardly place to put a golf hole!

I find the bunkers fascinating: these greens are huge but see how the bunkers are carved into the green itself? The effect is for a large green to feel, and often play, much smaller.

Scott, here's an aerial plus a few other pics:











Huh, that aerial does not look like the green at ground level...

jonathan_becker

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Royal Melbourne (East) - golf's 'A Tale of Two Cities'
« Reply #17 on: April 26, 2011, 07:10:24 PM »
Thanks, Mark.  Wow, from the tee it looks really pinched in the middle. 

Oh, one day Royal Melbourne....  (Sigh)  :)

Mark Bourgeois

Re: Royal Melbourne (East) - golf's 'A Tale of Two Cities'
« Reply #18 on: April 26, 2011, 09:55:06 PM »
There's a good discussion on that point -- big when you're on top of it, small from the tee -- hiding in the archives. If you've got a Google Machine you could maybe find it.

Mark Chaplin

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Royal Melbourne (East) - golf's 'A Tale of Two Cities'
« Reply #19 on: April 26, 2011, 10:29:28 PM »
When we played 16 the pin was centre left one day and back left the other, it is a damned tough hole although I also enjoyed 4E. Overall the East course has a great set of par threes as does the West course.
Cave Nil Vino

jonathan_becker

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Royal Melbourne (East) - golf's 'A Tale of Two Cities'
« Reply #20 on: April 26, 2011, 10:45:51 PM »
There's a good discussion on that point -- big when you're on top of it, small from the tee -- hiding in the archives. If you've got a Google Machine you could maybe find it.

I should have recognized the first and second photo from your RMC thread!  Shame on me for forgetting about the visual deception.

Scott Warren

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Royal Melbourne (East) - golf's 'A Tale of Two Cities'
« Reply #21 on: April 26, 2011, 11:00:31 PM »
Mark B: Thanks for the kind words and for adding the aerial and extra pics.

It's a hell of a green and though we had a front left pin, we played from the left-hand tee visible behind the back-left of the 4th green in your aerial, which made for an easier angle than from the back tee marked in the aerial.

Mark Bourgeois

Re: Royal Melbourne (East) - golf's 'A Tale of Two Cities'
« Reply #22 on: April 27, 2011, 06:20:16 AM »
There's a good discussion on that point -- big when you're on top of it, small from the tee -- hiding in the archives. If you've got a Google Machine you could maybe find it.

I should have recognized the first and second photo from your RMC thread!  Shame on me for forgetting about the visual deception.

No no, I was thinking of a different thread. Actually, there are a few good ones back there on the bunkers. You've got to let your obsession breathe!

John Mayhugh

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Royal Melbourne (East) - golf's 'A Tale of Two Cities'
« Reply #23 on: April 28, 2011, 08:24:24 AM »
Scott,
Thanks for your thoughts on the East course.  I'm pretty forgiving of the weak points that you mentioned, but couldn't the course be so much better with just a few improvements?

I really liked the huge expanse of the first and found that the approach angle from the shared fairway on the West isn't ideal.  Not sure if the tee shot on the second is a good one or not, but maybe the most difficult on either course if you cannot shape a shot.

No idea what I had on the 5th, but likely not an 8 as I would have picked up by then.

Carl Rogers

Re: Royal Melbourne (East) - golf's 'A Tale of Two Cities'
« Reply #24 on: April 28, 2011, 01:31:32 PM »
I regret that I will never live long enough to get to AU or NZ and play any of these courses.

But 1 question:  Bunkers: They all seem to have these incredibly tight sharp edges.  How is that done?

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back