News:

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


Chris Kane

  • Karma: +0/-0
Sandbelt courses near obsolete: Nicklaus
« on: January 29, 2002, 01:15:47 AM »
GCA's favourite son Jack Nicklaus has thrown his hat into the ring.  This article appeared this morning in The Age.

Melbourne's fabled collection of sandbelt courses would soon be rendered obsolete by the enormous advances in golf-ball technology, the game's greatest player, Jack Nicklaus, warned yesterday.

In a week when Royal Melbourne is hosting the $2 million Heineken Classic, Nicklaus said classic courses such as Royal Melbourne, Kingston Heath and Yarra Yarra would soon have to undergo major renovations in order to make them "playable" for major tournaments - because developments to the ball had been allowed to go unchecked in the past 20 years.

Left as they are, the eight or so sandbelt layouts would be dwarfed by modern golf balls that, thanks to science and technology, travel further and further each year.

Nicklaus said the problem had become so acute that even Augusta National, home of the US Masters and shrine of the game, was recently lengthened by some 300 metres, with the majority of holes affected.

"Royal Melbourne is a wonderful golf course and you've got so many other wonderful courses down here, it's a shame to see the golf ball controlling those courses the way it has Augusta and other courses in the US," Nicklaus said in an interview with The Age.

"But it's going to. If you're going to keep up with what's going in technology, you really don't have a choice - you have to adapt to the technology or become obsolete.

"We probably have less than 25 golf courses in the US now, with the equipment today, that are legitimate championship golf courses. You have the same situation in Australia. But if the golf ball was brought back 10 per cent, we'd have several thousand.

"That's not a difficult or expensive thing to do, I promise you. We produced a golf ball for a course down in the Cayman Islands in the Caribbean. They didn't have any land so they wanted a golf ball that went half as far as normal. What it really cost us was $US5000 for the tooling needed to build the ball for that golf course.

"That's not very much money when you talk about the millions and millions of dollars spent in developing the golf ball each year."

Nicklaus made his comments in Melbourne yesterday on a flying visit to officially sign off on his latest project in Australia, the Heritage Golf and Country Club at Chirnside Park in Melbourne's east.

And at midday today he will play a round at the Heritage, while wearing a microphone, with Ian Baker-Finch, Aaron Baddeley - who will arrive via helicopter for the last nine holes - and the club's professional.

"The golf course really looks good, it's a very strong course," Nicklaus said. "I think people are really going to enjoy it. The average golfer can play it, and it's also sensational from the back. Players will stand back there and say, 'Wow'.

"But I looked at it today, remembered the state of my own golf game and thought, `I'm going to play that tomorrow'?"

Since arriving in this country for the first time in 1962, Nicklaus has developed a special affinity for Australia.

He won six Australian Opens between 1964 and 1978, in places as diverse as Royal Hobart, Lake Karrinyup and the Lakes in Sydney, and on one of his early trips was described by local journalist Don Lawrence as the Golden Bear, a nickname that has stuck with him since then and become one of the most recognisable in sport.

Last week in Cleveland, Nicklaus had dinner with International Management Group supremo Mark McCormack and the sports agent produced out of a drawer Nicklaus' first Australian contract.

The contract was for 1500 pounds, with an extra 1000-pound guarantee for using Slazenger golf clubs.

"If I came to Australia, I got the 1500; if I didn't come to Australia, 1000 pounds is all they paid me. Can you imagine that?" Nicklaus said.

"Part of the reason I came down was my Australian contract with Slazenger. They gave me an airfare but there was no guarantee to play in the Australian Open. I came down here for maybe 20 years because I just wanted to play. Could you see the guys doing that today? There is no chance on this earth."

Nicklaus turned 62 last week and has not played a tournament since finishing third behind Ian Stanley in the British Seniors Open on July 29 last year. Given the dodgy nature of his back, and sundry other ailments, he is not sure whether his appearance today in front of 1000 or so Heritage members will be his last in Australia or not.

"I said to (Heritage founder) John Tickell this morning, this may well be my last round of the year tomorrow. I have no idea. I'm scheduled to play in a Seniors event in Naples (Florida) the week after ... but I just don't know if I can play a full event."

That's why, after 42 appearances at the US Masters since 1959, Nicklaus is unsure whether he'll be able to take his place in the field at Augusta in April.

In a sense, his remarks about golf technology amounted to the saddling up of an old hobby horse: Nicklaus has been banging on for years about the ball being the game's greatest concern. But, in the light of Augusta's recently unveiled changes, and Royal Melbourne's first hosting of a 72-hole tournament for six years, they carry a new resonance.

"What's happened is they've learned how to make a rock into a golf ball that can play," Nicklaus said of the manufacturers. "The old rocks we used to have as driving range balls used to go a long way. They've now made them very playable and done a wonderful job - too good a job really, that's the problem."

When told that the Australian Golf Union's new purpose-built championship course, Moonah Links, on the Mornington Peninsula, measured 6822 metres from the championship tees, Nicklaus was aghast.

"Good grief, that's 7500 yards," he said. "But what does that do? You can go ahead and build 7500-yard golf courses, but what does it do to every other course? It makes them obsolete. That's what I think is wrong. All the record books are redundant, all the comparables are gone, everything's gone."

Nicklaus' major championship tally of 18 remains the game's yardstick, but he said he fully expected Tiger Woods to one day surpass that record and, gasp, consign him to the dustbin of history.

"People say, with all his money, Tiger's going to lose his desire. I say, I don't think so," Nicklaus said.

"He set a goal - to break my records - and that's going to stay his goal until he does it. I would be very surprised if he doesn't break my records. Very surprised."

Until then, however, Nicklaus will continue to be known not just as the Golden Bear but - for golf fans, at least - the greatest.


While I feel he is on the right track about doing something with the ball, he has no idea about the sandbelt courses.  He has not played tournament golf on any of the courses he mentioned for at least a decade.

I walked around RM this morning with Mike Clayton and three other European Tour professionals, and watching them play made me realise how ludicrous Jack's comments are.  The greens were slow and there was no wind, but these guys were having a nightmare just trying to get near the pin.  The subtle borrows and mounds around the green ensure that these players can't just fire at the pin and be safe.  They had to think their way around the course.

Regarding a thread earlier this week in which people expressed a fear that RM was already obsolete: this could not be further from the truth.  Hole 4 (6 Composite, 4 West) was mentioned as a hole that could be overpowered - the drive isn't bothering the players anymore but no matter how close to the green they are it is still quite a feat to get anywhere near the hole.  Watch the quick greens and wind wreak havoc with their games come Sunday!
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Shane Gurnett

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Sandbelt courses near obsolete: Nicklaus
« Reply #1 on: January 29, 2002, 03:37:02 AM »
I think the old fella has a point, however I think the sand belt stands up to technological advances a whole lot better than most courses/collection of courses. With the premium on placement, as opposed to sheer distance, being such a feature of the Melbourne courses, I think a few more yards here and there doesn't make a whole lot of distance.

Also, I wonder how he went at the Heritage today, hitting his three wood onto all those stupidly long par 3's. I hope he had someone to spot his ball in the waist high rough too. But then again, he probably didn't get out of the cart too often (as we all have to do at the Heritage) so maybe it was a snack.

At least, I suppose, he has the balls to speak up now and then.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Justin_Ryan

Re: Sandbelt courses near obsolete: Nicklaus
« Reply #2 on: January 29, 2002, 04:22:03 AM »
Shane

Jack went alright out at The Heritage, he just kept hitting balls until he got one in the fairway.

The other funny thing was that he hit a persimmon driver with a steel shaft off the first tee, basically for ceremonial puroposes, which he dunked straight in the water.  I don't think we'll be hearing him call for a return to persimmon woods in a hurry, that's for sure.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

David_Elvins

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Sandbelt courses near obsolete: Nicklaus
« Reply #3 on: January 29, 2002, 03:44:30 PM »

I know it is illegal to disagree with Mike Clayton on this site, and I hope someone can prove me wrong but I was thinking that:

Yes, the sandbelt courses place a premium on hitting approaches from the right angle. But, doesn't this make them susceptible to increase technology because the shorter the approach shot the less the need to hit from a good angle. (Becase the ball spends more time in the air and less bouncing/rolling along the ground).

One other question that someone who knows a bit more than I do might be able to answer.  I think the playability and spin characteristics of balls such as the ProV1 is over rated.  Would it be possible to set up a course with greens (and I suppose fairways) so hard (firm) that players would consider going back to balata?

Would this be a good thing?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
Ask not what GolfClubAtlas can do for you; ask what you can do for GolfClubAtlas.

Rich Goodale (Guest)

Re: Sandbelt courses near obsolete: Nicklaus
« Reply #4 on: January 29, 2002, 04:44:11 PM »
David

Great post, and I fully believe that classic courses can be set up to test the best golfers in the world and that balata does have superior playing characteristics to the ProvV1 when these firm and fast conditions are achieved.  Just look at Lytham last year.  Paraparamu was a disappointment in this regard, by all reports.  It is not at all illegal to criticize Mike Clayton or any of the other luminaries who occasionally visit this site.  Their contributions and their egos stand up to scrutiny as well as (or as poorly as) any of us peons who just enter these conversations out of interest and/or love for the game.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

harleykruse

Re: Sandbelt courses near obsolete: Nicklaus
« Reply #5 on: January 29, 2002, 05:24:46 PM »
I sympathize with Rich Goodale in that disagreeing with Mike Clayton or anyone else posting on GCA should not be a problem.

From the few occasions I've met Mike and a reader of his coloumns I'm sure he would welcome any  banter or healthy discourse about matters of golf.

As for RM I'm looking forward to seeing the scores as the chance of windy conditions is pretty good at this time of the year. The greens will be firm and fast.




« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

cardyin

Re: Sandbelt courses near obsolete: Nicklaus
« Reply #6 on: January 29, 2002, 05:26:22 PM »
I have often wondered about Nicklaus and others who espouse reducing the distance a ball can be hit--and who also espouse the approval of only one ball for tournament play--how much would distance be reduced, and which single ball would be mandated for use?   I wonder because Nicklaus, for one, can't seem to stick with a ball manufacturer very long these days.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Chris Kane

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Sandbelt courses near obsolete: Nicklaus
« Reply #7 on: January 29, 2002, 05:34:49 PM »
Cardyin,

I'm sure if the USGA had the strength of character they would be able to introduce a tournament ball.  What they need to do is find a way to do it without getting the manufacturers offside.  How far would/should the distance be reduced?  That's a debate worthy of a separate thread!

The R&A won't be able to do it becuase of the structure of their organisation: the legal liability issues proclude them from taking a stand.

I'm sure Mike would be happy to debate his position: as a sandbelt 'disciple' I'm sure he'd welcome the opportunity to try and talk you round!
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Tim_Weiman

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Sandbelt courses near obsolete: Nicklaus
« Reply #8 on: January 29, 2002, 08:44:28 PM »
Mark Huxford:

While I've always been a big fan of Jack the player, I share your unease with his comments about the Sandbelt courses becoming obsolete.

Your are right.  Such comments tend to encourage the golf technology arms race in which loads of money is spent in the pointless pursuit of longer balls and longer courses and higher costs for the average Joe.

Jack seems to be suggesting RM follow the example of Augusta.  I wish he would make better use of his bully pulpit.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
Tim Weiman

Justin_Hanrahan

Re: Sandbelt courses near obsolete: Nicklaus
« Reply #9 on: January 29, 2002, 09:30:17 PM »
As a person who has worked in golf course construction in Asia and grown up playing in Melbourne, there are two things I think are relevant here.

Firstly, with the design techniques used by nearly every architect these days, there won't be courses like those on the Sandbelt built anymore - which is a massive shame, regardless of the length/difficulty of the courses.

The other thing - more relevant here - is that these courses they all say are "too short" or "being overrun by technological advances" seem to hold up extremely well under tournament conditions.

Every USPGA Tour course (new or old) can be set up to see the winner shoot 18-20 under. It is only when they choose to set it up tough that the course gets its own back.

Given this fact, there doesn't appear to be any hope for golf courses if you agree with Jack when he says the older courses are outdated and yet you can watch the new courses get torn apart in tournaments...

Go figure!

(By the way, one of the courses I worked on was a Nicklaus Design and it had some of the most rididulous design elements you could possibly imagine -  with Jack's imprimatur - so don't go listening to everything he says.)
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Mike Clayton

Re: Sandbelt courses near obsolete: Nicklaus
« Reply #10 on: January 30, 2002, 03:11:48 AM »
Since when was it illegal to disagree with me -they make a sport of it down here.

Playing RM these past few days it struck me no course will ever be obsolete if it still demands flawless shots to get within 10 feet of the hole -whether they be long or short shots and there are still plenty of long shots left at RM.This is rarely the case on the tour these days.Majors aside RM may be the only GREAT course in regular tournament use anymore.
You can bet there will be fewer shots hit stiff to the flag this week than any other professional event anywhere in the world this year
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Paul Daley

Re: Sandbelt courses near obsolete: Nicklaus
« Reply #11 on: January 30, 2002, 03:24:45 AM »
Thanks for posting this thread Chris; by the way, where did you learn to hit those low-raking stingers I saw at Commonwealth the other night? ;)

I have looked over Jack's comments from every conceivable angle and conclude: the Big guy's heart is truly in this ball issue, and trust he is not just carping on about the pill becuase he is past his prime - and sour. Let's give JN the benefit of the doubt on this particular point.

However, I am cynical about Nicklaus - the designer - spruking about the Sandbelt courses and their collective imminent obsolescence. Could he not be laying the groundwork for future design contracts for his design team?

When Nicklaus last played Royal Melbourne, he witnessed the rare occurence of four benign windless days - a freakish thing for this notorious city. How could he possibly understand the subtle inter-connection between firm, fast conditions, sensible roughs, imaginative pin placements, and gusty crosswinds, and importantly, winds that change 2-3 times per tournament which dissallow the player to acclimatise?

Given all this, surely length is less of a factor in Melbourne, than the U.S. where the tour follows the sun and competitors strike windy conditions only spasmodically?

In another way he is barking up the wrong tree: Let us pretend for a moment that his assessment is accurate. Even then, legendary courses shouldn't fall prey to the random acts of Augusta-style "white collar vandalism" just because a course may pose less of a challenge for 20-30 of the games elite golfers. So what if it is. And I don't for a moment think that RMGC does.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Peter Goss

Re: Sandbelt courses near obsolete: Nicklaus
« Reply #12 on: January 30, 2002, 04:51:20 AM »
The RM greens are so unbelievably good and true at present, it will be interesting to see how many longer puts are made compared to other courses. Scoring may well be very good due to an influence other than equipment or ball length/spin characteristics.
Skill should be rewarded and I don't have any problem about the defence of par if excellent greens contribute to low scores. It seems MacKenzie rarely spoke of "par." The best player will desevedly win.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Tony Ristola

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Sandbelt courses near obsolete: Nicklaus
« Reply #13 on: January 30, 2002, 12:58:03 PM »
How much faster are the Sandbelt courses greens today than 20 years ago?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Mike Clayton

Re: Sandbelt courses near obsolete: Nicklaus
« Reply #14 on: January 30, 2002, 02:34:37 PM »
Tony

I've played tournaments on the sandbelt for 25 years now and the greens have never altered significantly in speed -if at all.
When Claude Crockford was at RM -finished in the mid 70's after 40 years- they were unbelievable.In a few tournaments in the early 70's they were faster than today.

Lee Trevino described them after a 1974 tournament as 'the greatest joke since Watergate'
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

MIkde Duffy

Re: Sandbelt courses near obsolete: Nicklaus
« Reply #15 on: January 30, 2002, 04:18:57 PM »
Mike,

During Claude's time there, immediately before his retirement in 1975, the "greens" were in fact "browns" during tournaments.

Claude hardly watered them at all from the Wednesday morning preceding the tournament until Sunday evening.

The 1972 World Cup of Golf held at RM became almost "unputtable". I watched in disbelief as Weiskopt 5-putted the sixth and his partner, Jim Jamieson, four putted the 7th.

They were, in my opinion then, far too harsh to make the tournament an enjoyable spectacle, unless of course you belonged to the school of "humiliate the pro".

Yes, they were unbeliebably quick then, but I did like them tinged with green, not absolute browns.

Trevino's outbursts there I remember well. It could have had something to do with his all-night card-playing and boozing sessions and not just the golf course itself.

Its kind of queer how a golf course can get to you when one has a hangover of monumental proportions!!!!!!!!!!!1

« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Chris Kane

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Sandbelt courses near obsolete: Nicklaus
« Reply #16 on: January 30, 2002, 08:44:37 PM »
Wel Ernie has shot 64.  How long will it be until the first person says what's on the mind of the PGA Tour: is RM obselete like has been talked about?

Of course not, becuase we've seen players tear it up before for a day or two, and then come back to the pack.  I've never seen a tournament at RM where conditions were optimal for scoring over the whole four days.  Watch Els come back to the rest of the field tomorrow!

Even if someone does post -25, shouldn't the most important thing be that the most worthy player wins?  While I doubt scoring will be that low, it raises an interesting question: should a tournament course yield to low scoring like RM did for Ernie Els today?  My answer is yes.  He played brilliant golf and thoroughly deserved to score well.  

Mike's point is correct about approach shots to within ten feet.  You won't get anywhere near the hole without hitting a superb shot.  If you try to hit it close and fail in executing your shot you'll be eaten alive.  Witness the number of balls running off greens this week.

Paul, as a Golf Australia annointed 2-marker, you should be able to hit that stinger with ease.  A humble 14 like me relies on pure luck.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Danny Goss

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Sandbelt courses near obsolete: Nicklaus
« Reply #17 on: January 31, 2002, 02:27:51 AM »
I had a look at RM today as Els shot that great score. I am not sure why Chris is so sure he will come back to the field....he can play a bit you know Chris. Having said that he putted extremely well without hitting it very close at times. He hit a great drive to 3West (1 on this setup) to be in the valley just short. But the chip went 15 feet past and he got the putt. Not what you would call a "gimmee". He sunk a putt about the same length on 5West (3 here) and hit a superb drive on the next and left his 9 iron about 6 feet short which he got. I thought I was watching a good player who could really putt on what he said were the best greens he had played on. No reason why he couldn't keep it up.
John Daly hit an iron off 6 (4on this setup) and didnt make the corner and landed in the jungle. So much for the 6th becoming obselete! He also hit iron on the 10th west and was well short and right. So just because they can hit it 300+ they still have to manage their way around the place and with a bit of wind etc. its still got plenty of bite.
Although Badderly, Adam Scott and Justin Rose all hit medium irons to the 510 metre 17th East for their second. All over 330 metre drives!
On a personal note my 10 year old son was given a ball by both Els (Titleist ProV1) and Michael Campbell (Nike Tour Accuracy) so he had a big day also! Very friendly and agreeable people some of these top sportsmen.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Chris Kane

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Sandbelt courses near obsolete: Nicklaus
« Reply #18 on: January 31, 2002, 02:48:08 AM »
Perhaps he won't come back to the field, but I can't see him shooting 64 all week.  My impression is that the morning players such as Els had it much easier than the afternoon groups.  It was blowing a gale as the Channel Ten weatherman gave his report at 5.50pm from next to the putting green!

I imagine that if he is to win, he'll shoot scores such as 69 70 72 interchangably.  I hear that his conditions were good for scoring, which hopefully won't be the case all week.

Also, Mike Clayton had 77 today, so we need to rally behind him and ensure that he teaches these young hotshots a lesson or two tomorrow.  It'd be great to see him play the weekend, if only becuase he has trumpeted the venue so much and actually appreciates the place.  He's off the first at 8.20.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

dR kILDARE

Re: Sandbelt courses near obsolete: Nicklaus
« Reply #19 on: January 31, 2002, 02:58:02 AM »
I think the bookie boys will be winding in the price of Allenby tomorrow as he hits off early.
Get some of the $ 11 now I warn ya....
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

TEPaul

Re: Sandbelt courses near obsolete: Nicklaus
« Reply #20 on: January 31, 2002, 03:47:38 AM »
I'm in no way qualified to comment on whether or not the sandbelt courses are about to become obsolete with the advances in the golf ball as Jack Nicklaus is warning in this article because I've seen none of those courses and have never even been to Australia.

But it seems some of you boys are being unnecessarily  sensitive about Nicklaus appearing to criticize your courses. This might be a bit of "killing the messenger" and I think you should concentrate more on the point he's trying to make--which is the golf ball not your courses.

He really isn't suggesting that these courses and others like Augusta should to be redesigned and lengthened, but he is suggesting that's what's going to continue to happen if the ball is not reined in!

The point to focus on, in my opinion, is if the ball is brought back by the 10% Nicklaus is suggesting the subject of whether any of these "championship" courses are becoming obsolete will probably not be considered by anyone.

There is a great need today to do something on this issue of controlling distance advances and the golf ball truly is the simplest and most effective way to do it. In any effort to do that the regulatory bodies need all the help they can get and Jack Nicklaus is be no means an insignificant participant in that effort!

Some might even say that he's really thinking of a way to keep his awesome records intact, but I don't think that's the key issue here with Nicklaus--as he's been saying this for far too long. I think he's saying that it's better for the game to try to keep the "playing field as level as possible" through the eras!

In this sense and in this effort to control the distance the ball is going the more interesting participant would surely be Tiger Woods! It's clear his mission is not to be just considered the best player of his era but the best player of all time. He is the one who does not want to be considered "equipment aided" by anyone. It is clear his dream would be to somehow play on a "level playing field" against the likes of Nicklaus, Hogan and the elusive Bob Jones, because he's said so a number of times! That too should be taken seriously and for this reason he too is probably a very willing participant to do something about the distance problem. He clearly feels he could beat anyone in history on a "level playing field" and does not want anything to distort that perception.

As advocates to control the distance the ball is going the one/two punch of Nicklaus and Woods would be a powerful one indeed!
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Paul Daley

Re: Sandbelt courses near obsolete: Nicklaus
« Reply #21 on: January 31, 2002, 03:48:55 AM »
The course that won't yeild to great golf is weaker for the blemish; Els proved yet again the brilliance of Royal Melbourne:

Snead - 65, Irwin - 64, Mackay - 63 Ballesteros - 66

On each occasion, they were solitary awesome rounds among four.

Chris: I must admit my eyes nearly popped out of their sockets when reading about my stated h'cap in Golf Australia's latest issue. Yes, it was two - 22 years ago, but ...  
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Brian Phillips

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Sandbelt courses near obsolete: Nicklaus
« Reply #22 on: January 31, 2002, 06:24:53 AM »
I would just like to say how impressed I am with a lot of what you have said over the last months since I have noticed your name Chris.

If you have this much interest in architecture at the age of 17 you could maybe even become a younger version of Tom Doak.  In fact maybe you should try to get a job with him when the Barnbougledunes site gets off the mark.

Even doing a bit of finishing or drainage in your school holidays would teach you a lot about construction and design...

Keep up your comments...

Paul Daley,

With people like yourself, Chris and Greg Ramsey around you don't need any Nicklaus design team anywhere near Australia!!

Cheers Brian
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
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

Barney Grum

Re: Sandbelt courses near obsolete: Nicklaus
« Reply #23 on: February 01, 2002, 01:41:05 AM »
Chris,
You got Els second round correct with a prediction of 69. Well Done. Are you still sticking by your weekend predictions?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Chris Kane

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Sandbelt courses near obsolete: Nicklaus
« Reply #24 on: February 01, 2002, 04:43:04 AM »
Barney,

I got it right once, but I won't stick to it.  It was just a loose guess, nothing more.  If I was sure of it, I'd be down at the bookmaker right now!

I wouldn't have picked Richard Lee and his 62 even with the benefit of hindsight.  I'm still in shock.  The papers will be announcing a new Heineken Classic venue tomorrow, as it is obviously a weak course that is obsolete.  Patrick Smith in The Australian had this to say:

Royal Melbourne a shrimp on technology barbecue

It is not the done thing to pat yourself on the back. So we ask others to do it for us. Anyone with a slight accent and some sticks has been asked this week how they rate Royal Melbourne as a golf course. Apart from the Swedish backpacker picking up firewood for a barbecue who proved to be no help, everyone has said Royal Melbourne is in the top 10 in the world.

Some have been prepared to rate it nearly the very best if we actually placed the shot gun in their mouth. They were all emphatic if we cocked the trigger.

Incidentally, it was at this stage of the impromptu news conference with the backpacker that the Swede called a policeman. Matters were resolved when we bought him some shrimps and pointed him to the nearby coin operated gas barbecue.

The course, designed in 1926 by Dr Alister Mackenzie, is a wonderful track but it was plotted out before man had walked on the moon and John Daly's drives bounced off it.

Yesterday, in mischievous winds and on quickish greens, Ernie Els sliced it up. He took eight shots off par shooting nine birdies and one bogey. He likes the course and putted well. Tellingly, the South African was not at all surprised he ripped the course apart. It was there for the taking, he fancied.

Both Els and defending champion Michael Campbell hit driver and then wedge into the par 18th hole. It is 405 metres long. In 1926 it was a two-day expedition. Campbell can remember a time when he needed a good six-iron to get home.

The New Zealander cannot believe how technology has changed the way he plays this course. In the six years since he last played the composite layout, the course is playing two club lengths shorter and two to three shots easier.

What used to need a four iron to get home can now be done with a six iron. Nature has not shortened the course, just technology. Proof was in his score, four under par, and he thought he didn't play particularly well. "Nothing special," he said. He says technology, in certain cases, has made Royal Melbourne obsolete.

Daly's strategy around here is fascinating. It was thought the wide fairways would allow him to boom his driver and reduce every second shot to a wedge. That has not been the case. The fairways are wide enough, just not long enough.

In just 12 months Els has added 20, maybe 30 yards to his drives. He is doing nothing different except using a new driver that suits his swing perfectly. Els talks about launch angle – and who doesn't? – and says that his new driver has been made specifically to suit his 10 degree take-off.

Add what he claims to be the longest ball going around sees Els happy to attempt to drive at least three of the par fours here. If he lands in a greenside pot he explodes out and putts in. Birdie. That was not the good doctor's plan in 1926.

It is Jack Nicklaus's dream that every tournament uses the same standard ball. Els thinks the problem requires that and something else – calm down the ball and limit the driver. In his words: Put a handbrake on technology.

"I'm with it totally," he said. "Either that or they've got to lengthen golf courses like they did at Augusta and I'm not sure that's the right thing. The way Mackenzie designed it back in the 1920s and the way it is playing now, they are totally different courses. I guess you would have to do it, the way technology is going."

But what all this talk about technology does is raise the legitimacy of the evaluation of Royal Melbourne as one of the 10 best courses in the world. We need to clarify just what are the standards by which we make this judgment. If it is tradition, philosophy, contouring, bunkering, greens and aesthetics then there seems little doubt professionals who play all the courses in the world rate it among the best.

But it seems now that unless they set fire to the greens and dot wind machines around the course, Royal Melbourne is no longer one of the hardest courses. If that is the case then it doesn't deserve the adoration it has been given this week. It has become a 6395-metre shrimp on the barbecue of technology.


For those who didn't pick it, my comments regarding obsolescance were sarcastic.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:02 PM by -1 »

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back