Renaissance--An under-rated Doak course?

[Mac Plumart]

I know it seems weird, but could it be possible that the Top 100 lists have over-looked a Tom Doak course?

I had the great pleasure to play The Renaissance Club a few weeks ago and I found every aspect of it to be incredible.

For those who find the stereotypical Tom Doak style to be pleasing, it is there in spades.  The routing is natural and unforced, the greens are off-the-charts amazing, the variety of challenge is there, and the use of natural/pre-existing features is there as well.

The private nature of the club added an extra layer of enjoyment for me as I could totally unwind and relax while playing the game.  I didn't have to wait on any one in front of me, I wasn't worried about balls flying at me and/or hitting others with my shots like at many of the Scottish courses.

And the run from the inland holes to the seaside holes added such a great "feel" to the round.

I find it interesting that the course isn't more widely praised and/or ranked much higher.

Have other played it?  If so, what did you like or dislike?  What could be better?  What was perfect?  

I personally found the way the course eased you into the round to be excellent.







 I found the 8th green to be the best green.



 I thought the 11th hole was the best hole.  



And the run from hole 8 through 16 was tremendous in my opinion.

[JNC Lyon]

Mac,

A few of us on here have played Renaissance, though not as many as other Doak classics like Ballyneal or Pac Dunes.  Those of us that have played (myself, Scotty W, Mike Whitaker) seemed to enjoy it a great deal.  The green complexes there are dynamite.  The 4th (your second photo) is very cool with the shaven back bank.  8, as you say, is tremendous with the back shelf.  9 is a great front-to-back affair that should be a model for more short par threes.  10 is my favorite hole on the course, where the bunkers end 150 yards from the green and ground contours take over, culminating in a fantastic shelf green.  11 and 12 are solid holes out along the headland.  17 is a very dramatic par three with a wild green.  18 is a superb finisher combining centerline bunkers, a stone wall, and a diabolical pushup green.

Renaissance is an excellent layout, with the one weakness of having too many longer par fours (those holes on the back nine run together a bit in my mind).  It should get more discussion here.  My sense is that much of the bitterness surrounding Renaissance is that it is a very private club in a country famous for its public-access golf.  I find this "exception to the rule" much more acceptable than I do the vast majority of great courses in this country that are also private.

[Mac Plumart]

John...

The bitterness that you mentioned regarding the course and it being private is odd to me.  But I think you are totally correct.  In discussions with the locals while I was in Scotland about the course there always seemed to be an odd vibe about it.  And I mean odd in a bad way.  Which is a shame if that gets in the way of the course being recognized for its merit.

[Brent Carlson]

Mac,

How is the turf?  From your photos it appears very links like.  How far is the course from the firth?

[Mac Plumart]

Brent...

I am not the guy to ask about how the turf was.  I can give you a total layman's opinion, that is all.  In that vein, I thought it was great.  It played with a lot of bounce and roll out and you had to factor that in to all your shots.  First off, where will the ball land.  Secondly, where will it run along the ground to.  Very much like all the links courses.  If you need anymore than that, maybe a more educated turf man can speak on the topic.  Sorry.

How far is it from the Firth?  It is right on it.



11 leads up to it.  12 and 13 play right next to it.  14-17 has the Firth in the background.  However, my understanding is that it will be re-routed to have a few more dramatic holes along the Firth.

[Simon Holt]

Mac,

As with the other GCAers that have visited the course I am delighted you had such a positive experience at the club.  I feel we have something very special here as a club but the golf course is truly the star of the show.  This is obviously due to Tom, Don Placek and the rest of the guys at Renaissance Golf but our green staff are truly an amazing bunch of guys.  10 members of staff keep the course in that condition.  The feedback we receive week by week is incredible.  We had a few club pros here the other day and the thank you notes say it all - "better than or at least equal to any course I have played" was Alan Purdie from Kingsbarns take.

The greens are in incredible condition considering the winter we had.  It has been said that we are setting a new benchmark for links course presentation and conditioning.  This is down to having an owner that puts all our efforts into the course and Paul Seago and his staff for their attention to detail.  We are blessed with their local experience with links turf and their dedication to provide the best conditioned course in the country.  That is our number one goal.

We have been in operation for 3 years now and we still havent built a clubhouse.  This has been self vetting in a way- people are joining for the course and not the bells and whistles.  It also means that we haven’t stretched ourselves in tough times.  Why have a multi million £ clubhouse with only 170 members rattling around in it.  Probably only 80 at any one time.  We intend to build the clubhouse this year; well in time for 2013 next door at Muirfield.  We are signing members at an ever increasing rate so my boss is happy, which is turn makes me happy!

Here is a section from our Spring Sports Turf Research Institute analysis.


"Despite a few really underlying issues to the greens and fairways, the general condition,
presentation and playing quality of the course is truly superb. Accurate, conscientious and skilful
greenkeeping, combined with a strong work and team ethic from the greens staff is helping to
deliver very high standards of routine conditioning and playing quality at all times. We have said it
before but there is no doubt that The Renaissance Club is at the forefront of golfing facilities that are
setting new standards in terms of conditioning and playing quality."

It is a wonderful place to work.  I love my job!


S

[Scott Warren]

That's a pretty liberal use of the word "work" isn't it, Simon?

[Simon Holt]

PS.  Some nice shots there Mac.

We have recently hired fellow GCAer Mark Alexander to photograph the course.  I took him on a quick tour the other week and he was salivating; it was actually quite embarrassing Mark!  

Scotty- yes.


 

[Ulrich Mayring]

I don't think the bitter taste is about being private in general, but about being elitist. We had a course here in financial difficulties and they received an offer to buy them and replied: "Rather than selling to you, we'd close the course for good." Such antics don't go down well with people.

So if a private course is under-utilised and they're telling me that they'd rather leave it completely empty than letting me on, then that makes me feel shunned. Instead, if they're saying: "We do give out a few tee times on slow days, enter your name in this hat", then I believe this would not diminish the value for the members, but greatly enhance the course's stature in the neighborhood.

Ulrich

[Scott Warren]

The thing I don't understand is why the anti-private vitriol in Britain gets directed at Renaissance.

Why not Loch Lomond? Skibo Castle? Carnegie Club? Archerfield? Goodwood? Queenwood?

Who decides what is "under-utilised", Ulrich? I'd argue that the fact the course is "under-utilised" is one of the many things that appeal to many members and prospective members of Renaissance.

Why should the club feel obliged to welcome the public when it doesn't need to? The limited play surely helps the conditioning remain as fantastic as it is. Why jeopardise that?

It annoys me because it is a distraction from the fact that this is a seriously good golf course and it gets brought up every bloody time this course gets discussed.

[Simon Holt]

Hi Ulrich,

I am going to be very selfish and try to keep this on track.  I am keen, like Mac seems to be in the OP, to hear what people really think about the course.  I would rather talk about the gca not whether club X is more elitist than club Y; it is why I am on the site.  This is one course that I can contribute too as much as anyone so I am excited to be able to provide accurate answers.

Sorry if that comes across as a little defensive, I would love to hear your thoughts on the course if you have played.

S

[Ross Tuddenham]

Not to take it further OT and away from the GCA, but I would just like to add, as a local, that it is less bitterness but rather a lack of knowledge about the club I hear.  I have mentioned it in conversation and then realised that no one had heard of Renaissance or knew little of it.  The club is out of reach for most golfers in the area but then so is Muirfield, I guess maybe some feel frustration that great courses are on their doorstep yet they cannot play them.  Maybe however we should reflect on how lucky we are to have the many great courses in the area where you can just turn up and for a smallish fee play a great course.


I have to say the pictures you have taken look great Mac and show that this course may offer something a little different style wise compared to the other Scottish links courses.  Looks like there may be a little more width from the tee than some of the traditional links courses?

[Sean_A]

The thing I don't understand is why the anti-private vitriol in Britain gets directed at Renaissance.

Why not Loch Lomond? Skibo Castle? Carnegie Club? Archerfield? Goodwood? Queenwood?

Who decides what is "under-utilised", Ulrich? I'd argue that the fact the course is "under-utilised" is one of the many things that appeal to many members and prospective members of Renaissance.

Why should the club feel obliged to welcome the public when it doesn't need to? The limited play surely helps the conditioning remain as fantastic as it is. Why jeopardise that?

It annoys me because it is a distraction from the fact that this is a seriously good golf course and it gets brought up every bloody time this course gets discussed.

Scott

I don't know what folks in Scotland say, but I don't think there is that much elitist vitriol down here - is there?  If so, by far and away the most I hear about is Loch Lomond and often times that is really a way of saying the members are daft for paying so much when quality courses are everywhere for far less.  I don't think all that many golfers have heard of Renaissance and if they have, many can't remember its name.  Seriously, Castle Stuart, Renaissance and Archerfield are mixed up all the time by folks who have heard of them.  There must be something about those names which aren't particularly memorable - likely until one plays one or the other.   In any case, can't one play Renaissance with a phone call/letter?  Maybe I am wrong, but I thought they accepted limited visitors (maybe that is for perspective members?).  

Simon

Has there been any headway with the proposed new holes?

Ciao

[John Kavanaugh]

Try living in the United States where every time you join a newly built course you know their are 2000 raters and bloggers who will play your new course for free.  It gets harder and harder to write that check.  Quit bitching about the guys who pay for these fields of play.

[Ally Mcintosh]

I'll throw my tuppence in:

1. Looking at it from a purely public perception / ratings point of view, I think it will be a slow burner. I've come to this conclusion because it entered the Golf World Top 200 in 2008 before climbing in to the 70's in 2010... Most hyped new courses enter high, plateau and then start falling as the hype wears off....

2. I would be incredibly happy if it hosts The Scottish Open in the near future. In fact, if the Scottish Open were to circulate between Renaissance, Castle Stuart and the new Trump course then I think this would be an wonderful outcome, showing that links golf and great golf course architecture is as much a part of the future as the past (which a surprising number of golfers away from this website believe)...

3. If the new 3 or 4 holes get built closer to the firth, then I think you will see the course take a step jump in the general opinion. It is true links land down there and the people love their true linksland and their sea views.

4. It will also alleviate one of my minor negative comments about the course. I am certainly not one to question Tom's routing skills but I do think the front nine at The Renaissance Club have a slight sardine effect, despite the triangle of 1,2,3... Some of my favourite holes are in those first 6 or 7 but they do not provide the most inspiring start for many. That is not to say that there was a better option - I'm sure there wasn't.

5. Comment 4 aside, I thought the course was excellent. It is the only Doak / Renaissance course I have seen in the flesh and I thought the shaping, style and placement of hazards was wonderful. A superb collection of golf holes and a course I hope goes from strength to strength.

[Simon Holt]

Ross,

You have hit the nail on the head!  We do not advertise or tout for magazine reviews so little is known about us.  Sometimes I feel this works against us, certainly in the rankings for those that way inclined.  6th Modern GB&I in Golfweek  and 73rd GB&I in Golf World is not bad, but even with my non-Renaissance glasses on I know we are far better than that.  I don't want to start that conversation though!

The fairways are wider than most courses in the area; the rough is pretty penal but there is not much of an excuse to miss the fw once you know where you are going.  The importance is WHERE in the fairway!    It is not too demanding off the tee but angles into greens are key.  The greens and more than before the bunkering are just off the charts.

Sean,

Yes, if you call the pro shop you can request to play.  One might baulk at the price of £200 but it is a way of allowing a once only pay and play without drifting too far from our model.  If someone joins then we fully refund this which I think is fair.  At one point we had a lot of "potential members" calling up so I thought this was the best way to approach it.  I like the balance.

The holes are very close but I will have to keep quiet for a little while longer; my boss had a piece in the paper so its no great secret but I don't like to curse things!  Also out of respect for Tom as I am sure come the time he may want to be the first to let everyone in on what is happening.  At the end of the day I know all the goings on at the club but it is not my domain!

S

[Simon Holt]

Ally,

I suppose I agree with point number 4 to a degree.  Certainly the first few times I played I thought that.  I actually think the skill in design is more prevalent on the front 9 due to the flat terrain.

I have never been a huge fan of the 6th.  I find the drive awkward.  The stack of trees on the right is a long carry off the whites, let alone the blues so for most mortals that is a no no.  If you go left the ground has now firmed up so well that you often run out of fairway or catch the bunker.  You have to hit a perfect 5 yard fade (RH) off that bunker, around the trees to really go at your driver. 

Once around the corner it is a bit of a freeway straight down to the green.  Flat and featureless ground doesn’t help.  There is a cool mound off the tee on the left that straightens up the drive for the shorter hitters and gives them a kick forward.

7 through 12 is world class in my book.  Wonderfully shaped fairways, incredible greens and interesting use of the man made features.

Undoubtedly the holes right on the water will elevate the course further but I actually really like the balance of the trees and open linksland.

S

[Terry Lavin]

Looks quite alluring to me.  The public/private issue must be some sort of cultural imbroglio that I just cannot fathom.  As others have mentioned, we have quite the opposite situation hereabouts, with the overwhelming majority of the great courses in the States being private.  Oh, well.

[Mark Pearce]

I don't want to take this thread too far off topic because I too have played RC and thought it was an excellent course, deserving of much praise.  However, there's some rather silly exaggeration going on here.  Vitriol?  Most of my non-GCA mates haven't heard of RC, so most certainly don't direct vitriol at it (or anywhere else).  The totally private model is very rare indeed in the UK and only in force at a handful of modern clubs.  All the great traditional clubs will allow visitor play.  That's just the way the UK golf culture has developed.  Then again, even the great old clubs cost nothing like as much to join or belong to as a US private club of the same quality.  There is, therefore, a lack of understanding of this model amongst UK golfers.

I must admit to being very glad that UK golf is as it is and that I can gain access to all the great courses I want to without introductions.  However, I loved my day at RC and, so long as the new wave of US style clubs doesn't mean that the existing UK model breaks down, I'm happy for what remains a small handful of these clubs to serve that section of the market (to the extent it exists) in the UK.  I suspect, in fact, that the market is largely an overseas one, with a few domestic members who have the financial means but not the contacts or patience to join, say HCEG or North Berwick.

[Simon Holt]

Hi Mark,

Quite the opposite.  50% of our membership is from the UK with the large majority of that being the surrounding area.  40% is US and 10% the rest of the world.  Of the members we took in last year 70% were from Scotland and it was our best intake since we opened in 2008.  It is actually quite the opposite of what people think it is, although eventually I think we will have around 45% domestic, 65% overseas. 

The reality is that I am not making this stuff up; people seem to think they know the model when in fact they don't.  I am not directing that at you personally as obviously we have met and you know what I am like, its just frustrating to have to repeat it each and everytime someone mentions RC on here. 

We have a large number of members that are already members of the clubs you mention, and a few other very old, very traditional clubs that govern our game today.  It provides them with something different.  I am not on here to justify that- there is a niche, it works, our price is increasing and we are taking in more members than the previous year, mainly from the UK.  Perhaps we are just bucking the trend or is the general consensus of the trend incorrect?

I know for a fact that a very large proportion of the US membership at LLGC decided not to rejoin.  Virtually all the Scots did.  Who said we were tight???!

There is plenty of GCA to talk about.  It is perhaps the most interesting course built in Scotland for 100 years (diverse terrain and landscape) and all people want to talk about is the business model.


S

[Ulrich Mayring]

No one (I believe) is criticising the business model, but the original poster was wondering why it had less of a reputation than it perhaps should. And I believe the business model might have something to do with that, especially if it involves an under-utilised course. The good news is that it is very easy to fix without detriment to the members.

We've just had a local citizen vote turn out 75% against extension of a golf course. The reason? People were used to the land "being there" and would feel locked out of it. If they were golfers and able to play the course, I bet they'd have voted differently.

Ulrich

[Mac Plumart]

Well, I think I might have the answer.  Darn shame!  Hopefully, Renaissance gets a Scottish Open and some good publicity shines on it.  The course deserves it.

[John Kavanaugh]

Well, I think I might have the answer.  Darn shame!  Hopefully, Renaissance gets a Scottish Open and some good publicity shines on it.  The course deserves it.

So, are we supposed to be worried about bloggers and critics holding a club hostage because they won't let them play cheap and often?

[Jud_T]

Mac (and others knowledgeable),

Compared to other Doak courses, with perhaps the exception of Sebonack, does RCAA play more like a tougher championship test?  In other words, would your average medium hitting 15 handicap enjoy playing the course day in and day out as his home club?

[Mac Plumart]

would your average medium hitting 15 handicap enjoy playing the course day in and day out as his home club?

Jud...yes, yes, and yes.  It was a pure joy to play.  You aren't asked to hit heroic water carries, you aren't required to hammer to ball 300 yards.  It fits the classic definition of great, playable by the average golfer and a challenge for the low marker.  

I tried to show some photos that are representative of how the course plays and feels.  Pretty open off the tee, but get out of position and the bunkering and greens will make par difficult.  However, you won't loose your ball and be frustrated by that aspect of golf.  

Personally, I think it is a "better" course than Sebonack.  Sebonack is excellent and has a few all-world holes, but it also has a few odd holes that don't totally fit in my book.  And Sebonack's difficulty is a tad too much to fit the classic definition of great.  And there is a mismatch between Sebonack's green undulations and greens speeds.

I find Renaissance to be in the ballpark of Ballyneal.  I've only played these courses once (Ballyneal, Sebonack, and Renaissance), so I am not an expert...but I think Renaissance and Ballyneal are comparable.  Ballyneal's greens might be more wlid, but 8 at Renaissance is in Ballyneal's category...11 and 17 certainly have high interest and drama.  Ballyneal might more seemlessly blend in with the environment, but Renaissance is no slouch.  The Firth being there adds a bit of drama and beauty to Renaissance, but again Ballyneal is no slouch either.

And, I guess, that is the reason for my post.  Renaissance isn't totally blown out of the water by these two other golf courses, but it doesn't get the same love.   And I wanted to talk about it to see if I was missing something.