[Niall C]

I was all ready to post a reply on this thread last night and then the whole of the north of Scotland had a power cut due to the weather. Springtime in Scotland indeed !

Ross/Sean/Simon,

I agree totally about Renaissance flying under the radar for most club golfers in Scotland never mind the rest of the UK. I will admit that many years ago when the development was first muted I was against the elitist idea as it was presented then in the media but once you've been there and met the individuals concerned that becomes less of an issue, or maybe I'm just easily corrupted 

To answer the original question, is the course under rated ? If that means is it under rated in comparison to other Doak courses then I can't say because this is the only one I've played. If the question is in comparison to other Scottish courses then maybe/maybe not. I think it is a very good course, and great fun to play. Whether its a great course depends on your definition of great but if this course was a hundred years old and had a similar history to North Berwick I have no doubt that it would be hailed as great.

Ally

Re your point 4, regarding parallel fairways, I actually saw that as a positive in a perverse sort of way. I asked Mike Savardi what his brief to the architect had been and he answered that they had asked Tom to produce a traditional Scottish design, a course which looked as though it had been around a hundred years (or at least that is my recollection of the gist of what he said). To me the parallel fairways are a throwback to old courses as was the scale of the place.

Given what I've read on here I was expecting super wide fairways but the course instead has a traditional feel and scale. Of course the parallel fairways and width of the fairways may just be a result of constraints to do with the size and shape of the site but whatwever I enjoyed the traditional feel and lack of bling. That lack of bling was no more evident than the par 3 at the top end of the site (13th ?) which faced away from the water and the best view in the property. Other GCA's would have probably found the temptation to use the view as a backdrop to the green too hard to resist, I know I probably would have. Again I could be giving Mr Doak too much credit there but either way the finished hole appeals to the good Scottish Calvinist in me.

Niall

[Tim_Weiman]

Mac,

We know Tom Doak hasn't been afraid to go into tough neighborhoods (e.g., Sebonack), but building just down the road from North Berwick is taking on an enormous challenge.

Anyway, if the club ever gets approval to build the three holes down by the water, my sense is that the perception of Renaissance will change and be elevated considerably.

As for the social issues, the next door neighbor doesn't exactly let any local play whenever they want.

[Sean_A]

Niall

To be clear, I don't like the private is private model, but I don't have a problem with it.  There is too much fish to be had to worry about the one(s) that got away. 

Ciao

[James Boon]

- The Renaissance looks and sounds a great course but most people seem to want to talk about the business model
- Castle Stuart is a great course but most people want to talk about the fake antiquity and business model
- Askernish will be a great course but most people talk about its location or question its history

And yet there have been plenty of occasions where a course opening is surrounded by hype about how good the course is but they soon fall off the radar. Maybe the fact that so many new courses are surrounded with hype, naturally makes the British public cautious of anything new, and when you have proven, established, historic clubs its not surprising? Lets hope some of these modern courses like The Renaissance et al are slow burners? Word of mouth will soon get around and the design and the courses will hopefully become appreciated for what they are without the hype?

Cheers,

James

[Martin Toal]

- The Renaissance looks and sounds a great course but most people seem to want to talk about the business model
- Castle Stuart is a great course but most people want to talk about the fake antiquity and business model
- Askernish will be a great course but most people talk about its location or question its history

And yet there have been plenty of occasions where a course opening is surrounded by hype about how good the course is but they soon fall off the radar. Maybe the fact that so many new courses are surrounded with hype, naturally makes the British public cautious of anything new, and when you have proven, established, historic clubs its not surprising? Lets hope some of these modern courses like The Renaissance et al are slow burners? Word of mouth will soon get around and the design and the courses will hopefully become appreciated for what they are without the hype?

Cheers,

James

The Renaissance does indeed look like a great course.

The phenomenon can work the other way too. Old Head in Ireland is feted for its spectacular setting and locally reviled for its blocking of a coastal walkway, and either or both of those have obscured what is reportedly (I haven't played it myself) a rather underwhelming course.

[Scott Warren]

http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,44352.0.html

There's a full tour of pics in that thread, including some of the new land, for those who've asked questions about the course in this thread.

[Ally Mcintosh]

Ally

Re your point 4, regarding parallel fairways, I actually saw that as a positive in a perverse sort of way. I asked Mike Savardi what his brief to the architect had been and he answered that they had asked Tom to produce a traditional Scottish design, a course which looked as though it had been around a hundred years (or at least that is my recollection of the gist of what he said). To me the parallel fairways are a throwback to old courses as was the scale of the place.

Given what I've read on here I was expecting super wide fairways but the course instead has a traditional feel and scale. Of course the parallel fairways and width of the fairways may just be a result of constraints to do with the size and shape of the site but whatwever I enjoyed the traditional feel and lack of bling. That lack of bling was no more evident than the par 3 at the top end of the site (13th ?) which faced away from the water and the best view in the property. Other GCA's would have probably found the temptation to use the view as a backdrop to the green too hard to resist, I know I probably would have. Again I could be giving Mr Doak too much credit there but either way the finished hole appeals to the good Scottish Calvinist in me.

Niall

Niall,

If the "parallel fairways work because it's like a traditional links" thought was a primary motivator in Mr. Doak's routing process, then I'll eat my golf shoes...

I also think the scale of the site is enormous and if you mark off the distance between the centrelines of those parallel fairways then you'll find an average of more like 80m rather than the 50 or 60m you might find on an older, "smaller" course... all guesswork of course... worth a check on google earth though...

Just a reminder, because each of these holes is excellent in its own right, I don't find the up and down of the first 6 or 7 to be more than a negligible hindrance...

[Scott Warren]

Ally,

I agree Renaissance is much wider than your average links. Much wider.

It is long from the backs, but if you know your limitations and play the tees that match your length and ability it's nothing near a slog - 4, 8, 9, 10, 12 as I recall it are all on the short side for their length and only 2, 5, 11 and 18 sit in my memory as being long for their par.

And if you place your ball wisely, the putts have a surprisingly small amount of movement in them.

[Simon Holt]

Forget the blue tees as they are 7400 yards, Par 71.  A true Championship test, if guys go back there and feel it is long then they are right!!

I agree with Scott that 2, 5, 11 and 18 feel long for their par but as ever the wind comes into it.  The easiest comparison is probably holes at North Berwick.


The white tees at RC are 6900.  NB is 6400, so it is undoubtedly longer but here a  a few like holes in length and par.

The 5th is 443 par 4.  The 17th at North Berwick is 425 uphill.

The 11th is 429 par 4 uphill but the day Scott played went off a tee that was 490, albeit elevated.  The very back is 514.  There is no getting around it- this is a big hole!  While the hole looks awesome from the back tee most people will take a 5 from back there.


The 18th is 461 par 4.  The 3rd at North Berwick is a par 4 over 460 yards with a wall in the way, and both holes play in roughly the same direction.

RC just has more holes in the 420-440 range of that particular set of tees.  I do feel there is still a great balance of short holes though.

1. 377
3. 386
7. 394
8. 325
9. 137
12. 399

And if you want shorter then just move forward on a few holes.  Thats whats so cool- you can create your own course within these varying tees.  Downwind I would play 10 off the very back 593 but in that same wind I would play 15 off the yellows at 394 compared to blue 448 or white 418.

In a way I think by giving people carte blanche into what tee they play off means that golfers see it as difficult as some wander to tees that just are not sensible for their ability.  7400, Par 71 is long for anyone.  6850 is long 6300 is sensible and 5323 for the ladies is solid.

We mix and match tees all the time.  The most popular seems to be white downwind, yellow into.  This gives a course with meaty downwind holes to massage all our egos and holes that are reachable into the wind.  I still think if you stick with the way Tom has set it out on whites and yellows then everyone that comes here has a great time.

S

[Gary Slatter]

Simon, from Mac's picture of the first hole:  has the long rough to the right been cut back?  When I played (RC 2009) the first hole was the most difficult drive to figure out.
Hope all is well, glad to hear you are signing up Scottish members.

[Jud_T]

Simon,

Thanks for posting.  What percentage of the membership plays from 6300?

[Simon Holt]

Gary-

we have cut the rough down on the right of the first to speed play up off the first tee.  unlike the rest of the course the rough is maintained under those trees so as long as you watch the ball down you should find it quickly.  Its a good use of layering on the left which means that while it looks really tight, even if you carry 210 you should be in the fairway between 1 and 3 if you go left.

Jud-

My pleasure.  Its hard to put a number to that question as people do tend to mix and match.  I would say as time goes on the number has definitely got higher.  We are only just 3 years old so the period of members trying to slog it out off the 6900 tees has slowly deminished.  I would say the vast majority now play off the 6300 while the lower single figure golfers would always play the whites and some of the blue tees.

I always recommend white downwind, yellow into as a rule of thumb for a first timer.  If it is an older golfer or high handicapper I may suggest certain holes to move forward on.


The course is in fabulous condition.

[Ross Tuddenham]

Simon

I really like your idea of suggesting people mix up the tees they use, it is something I do when playing my home course on my own if the wind is really up.  I have never had such advice from a club when starting a round, I guess they want to keep visitors of the white tees.  I don't see it as reducing the challenge in the wind as it is often as little as a ten yards but it brings the interest back to the hole as opposed to just being a slog.  I usually deploy this tactic if the wind gets to about the 3/4 club stage.

[Niall C]

Ally

What flavour are your shoes ?

I too was speaking from memory and other than the semi being narrower by a yard or two thereby widening the fairway a bit, I don't recall the overall hole corridor being miles wider than say Muirfield next door, and certainly it was a lot less than Castle Stuart which RC normally gets bracketed with. Could be wrong though, so if there's any clever chap useful with google earth ?

BTW, I wouldn't say all the holes were excellent but I would say that all had some interest for me. A lot of that had to do with the greens surrounds. I spent all day missing greens and had a fantastic time chipping, putting and running shots in.

James,

As seems a matter of when rather than if RC gets the Scottish Open, I think you will see its reputation secured in the next few years with a corresponding leap up the rankings, no doubt helped by the new holes. After all what rater would readily admit they marked it wrong initially 

Niall

[Ally Mcintosh]

Ally

What flavour are your shoes ?

I too was speaking from memory and other than the semi being narrower by a yard or two thereby widening the fairway a bit, I don't recall the overall hole corridor being miles wider than say Muirfield next door, and certainly it was a lot less than Castle Stuart which RC normally gets bracketed with. Could be wrong though, so if there's any clever chap useful with google earth ?

BTW, I wouldn't say all the holes were excellent but I would say that all had some interest for me. A lot of that had to do with the greens surrounds. I spent all day missing greens and had a fantastic time chipping, putting and running shots in.

James,

As seems a matter of when rather than if RC gets the Scottish Open, I think you will see its reputation secured in the next few years with a corresponding leap up the rankings, no doubt helped by the new holes. After all what rater would readily admit they marked it wrong initially 

Niall

Niall, I wasn't really referring to Muirfield which is also on a grand scale and has a routing that actively avoids placing holes adjacent / parallel to each other.

That said, checking the distances on google earth, The Renaissance club doesn't actually have particularly wide playing corridors on the holes that are truly adjacent (e.g. 4 & 5, 8 & 18, 15 & 16). And seeing as we've a triangle at 1,2,3 and both 6 & 7 dog-leg off the parallel that is set by 4 & 5, then it was a little misleading to state that they create a sardine effect. But they do feel that way to a degree.

I fully expect my golf shoes to remain on my feet though. I know no architect who would prioritise routing a back and forth pattern of holes, regardless of brief.

[Niall C]

Ally

I suspect that you are right about my interpretation of intent with the parallel fairways. I wonder if they weren't concerned about it on the basis that they would be replacing some of those holes at a later date ? Either way I did notice it, but it cause me a concern.

Niall

[Tom_Doak]

The parallel fairways you mention were a product of trying to minimize the clearing of trees, which was a major permitting issue.  Holes 4 & 5 and 8 & 18 were bunched into existing clearings.  All of those holes will stay in the ultimate routing if we get the permit for the holes on the point ... it's the triangle of 1-2-3 which will be removed to become a practice facility.  My crew has very mixed feelings about that change, because we were all quite proud of the work on the three opening holes in relatively flat terrain and in the trees ... even though the holes on the point will be a great addition.

[Niall C]

Tom

Thanks for chipping in, saves me from coming up with any more nonsense ideas. I note what your saying about the first 3 holes. I suppose there's no chance of them keeping those holes purely as practice holes ?

I'd be interesting to hear how you are going to route in the 3 new holes, if you are allowed to say that is.

Niall

[Tom_Doak]

Niall:

They do want to keep the first three holes for practice holes, although the current first will probably be shortened in order to enlarge the practice tee.  They may also decide to build a couple of extra greens to make a five- or six-hole practice loop for families and kids.  But, that's all still pending the final approval for the holes we want to add to the big course; the decision is supposed to be made on June 13.

[Mac Plumart]

Niall:

They do want to keep the first three holes for practice holes, although the current first will probably be shortened in order to enlarge the practice tee.  They may also decide to build a couple of extra greens to make a five- or six-hole practice loop for families and kids.  But, that's all still pending the final approval for the holes we want to add to the big course; the decision is supposed to be made on June 13.

This place sounds like it is going to get even better!  Keep on, keepin' on guys...great stuff!!

[Niall C]

Niall:

They do want to keep the first three holes for practice holes, although the current first will probably be shortened in order to enlarge the practice tee.  They may also decide to build a couple of extra greens to make a five- or six-hole practice loop for families and kids.  But, that's all still pending the final approval for the holes we want to add to the big course; the decision is supposed to be made on June 13.

Tom

Thanks for the update, look forward to hearing how it pans out.

Niall

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()