[Scott Macpherson]

In conducting some research into the incomparable MR Willie Park Jr last week I visited Huntercombe and was delighted to see such a wonderful, interesting course so comfortable in its own skin.

I had read about Huntercombe and knew that it was designed as a residential golf development in 1901 – and was a landmark course along with Sunningdale for WP Jr– but one that had not succeeded financially ( I think only one house was built).  While it may have lost money, the course doesn't lose your interest. The course manager gave us the tour, and what architectural curios there are around the course, and interesting use of slopes.

Holes like 3 and 4,7, 8, 11, 16 were full of features that we don't see designed today. Indeed, so pointy, shart, or step are some of the features, many of them have to be cut with a strimmer (weed-eater).

Golf at Huntercome is mainly 2-ball, so that means foursome (alternate shot) if four people are playing, which seems like a fun way to enjoy this course. (permission from the secretary needed for a 3-ball to be played.)

Anyway, here are a couple of photos of the course. Has anyone else been there?


5th Hole

5th Hole

18th- approach to green over little swale

4th Green

7th- Note bunkers.

7th

Crater on 13th Hole

17th Hole- Short par 4, 272 yards

Grass bunker. (There are very few sand bunkers on the course, and one chap we were with couldn't remember there being any sand bunkers on the course 40 years ago.

[Scott Warren]

Scott,

It's an absolutely wonderful place and a singular course.

As you noted - the greens are bold and the features are quite unique and sharp at times.

The the centreline grass bunker in the DZ of the 16th is one of the best features I saw in two years in the UK. It extracts a massive penalty from the better golfer, who cannot get home in two from the bottom of it, but for a lesser player, the opportunity is still there to advance the ball a decent distance.

The greens are a wonderful set, from the bold tiers of 4 and 8 to the front to back slopes of 2 and 10, the punchbowl 15th, the centreline bunker and front to back slope at 12, the "postage stamp" 17th... just so much to see!

[Mark Pearce]

Scott,

It's a bit of a favourite with the GCA crowd and at least two members of the forum are members there.  It's a tremendous course, great greens and really interesting man-made features.

Indeed, thinking about how much I have enjoyed courses with obviously artificial features (Huntercombe, Kington, Lawsonia), I'd really like to see more.  It's a shame that that style is currently so unfashionable IMHO.

[Bill_McBride]

Huntercombe is living history and is too much fun to play with all those exotic man-made features.  The green complexes are just amazing; all are extensions of the fairways at grade level, with side-by-side tiers, steep rear tiers, front to back thrillers.  The opening stretch of the first four holes just about took my breath away!   17 has the only built up green on the course, and those deep fronting bunkers were a different challenge from the other greens that could all be played on the ground.

Great call on the low key ambiance, it's really a lovely place.

[David_Tepper]

I am pretty sure there have been at least one or two extensive Huntercombe threads here over the past few years. I think both Philip Gawith and Sean Arble have posted photo tours of the course. 

[James Boon]

Here is Sean's thread...
http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,32228.0.html

Huntercombe is delightful, and certainly a favourite on here, though I know very few other golfers who have heard of or played the course.

I love the clubs new logo, which is a simple red kite, thanks to their abundance in the area.

Cheers,

James

[Scott Warren]

Indeed there have been, David.

Sean Arble's (with input from James Boon): http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,32228.0.html

From last spring when John Lyon and I both visited: http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,43364.35.html

Philip Gawith's H'combe v Swinley "match": http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,43551.0.html

[Sean_A]

So, I eventually came round to thinking that many of the hollows are man-made.  If true, where did all the fill go?  So many parts of the course look to be grade level that it is hard to believe that fill was smoothed in expertly while there are many alps which are anything but smoothed in expertly.  What gives?

Ciao   

[Brent Hutto]

Maybe they were man-made but prior to the construction of the course. Kind of like the rigs (furrows?) at Alwoodley.

[Scott Macpherson]

Great, glad the course has been duly noted in other threads.

Sean, as regards the 'craters', like on the 14th (the original 1st hole), it was proposed that some could have been created by German bombs dropped during WWII. Anybody know if there could be any truth in this?

scott

[Sean_A]

Great, glad the course has been duly noted in other threads.

Sean, as regards the 'craters', like on the 14th (the original 1st hole), it was proposed that some could have been created by German bombs dropped during WWII. Anybody know if there could be any truth in this?

scott

Scott

There could be truth in the theory, but I have to wonder. Cowley was heavily bombed and I suspect Abingdon (RAF base located there) was as well.  Huntercombe is just south of these areas, but I would have thought flight patterns would have come in from northeast of London so as to avoid the heavily defended southeast coast.  Also, if flying back over London, why not drop the excess bombs there?  Of course, a pilot could have been lost or with damaged aircraft and just unloaded.  Its hard to answer the question without knowing more details.

Ciao

[Scott Macpherson]

Sean,

the person was saying that they thought the British government put lights out on the golf course to make it look like an airstrip so the Germans would bomb it, and not the real airstrip nearby (was there one nearby?). Also something to do with the Germans used rivers, canals etc to get their bearings and that Huntercombe was near some of these landmarks that the Germans used. Is this true?

scott

[Sean_A]

Scott

Well of course the Thames runs through Oxford, Abingdon, Wallingford and Henley.  Its not too far from Huntercombe to Henley and I spose in the dark pilots couldn't tell the elevation change down to the river valley.  It is also well known that mock airstrips were put in place (perhaps Dr Mac won the day afterall) not far from actual airstrips.  Henley had a strip in which Spitfires were assembled - I think.  There was a heck of a lot of production in and around Oxford as the work was piecemealed out to avoid bombing having a huge success if Cowley took severe damage. 

I used to be into planes and war ships big time - got it from my father.  Thankfully I have forgotten nearly all of that stuff.

Ciao

[JNC Lyon]

Scott,

It's a bit of a favourite with the GCA crowd and at least two members of the forum are members there.  It's a tremendous course, great greens and really interesting man-made features.

Indeed, thinking about how much I have enjoyed courses with obviously artificial features (Huntercombe, Kington, Lawsonia), I'd really like to see more.  It's a shame that that style is currently so unfashionable IMHO.

I think the reason these features at Huntercombe are so appealing is that, despite being artificial, the mounding has a rugged, sporty quality to it.  The mounding at Huntercombe is randomized, and it often comes into the direct line of play.  Holes like 2, 4, 6, 7, 13, and 16 have wild mounds that are centerline features.  Artificial mounding is unfashionable because modern architects have misused it as containment and framing that is out of the line of play.  Thus, there is a distinct contrast between "rugged and on the line of play" on classic layouts and "sterile out of the line of play" on modern layouts.

In short, the artificiality at Huntercombe is completely different from the artificiality at lesser modern layouts.

[JNC Lyon]

Scott,

Huntercombe was one of my favorite courses I saw while in England.  I prefer it to Swinley Forest and Addington, both of which I find to be very fine layouts.  Huntercombe is a such a unique golf course, relying on centerline hazards and ground contours more than any course I have ever seen.  It is completely quirky and old-fashioned golf, but, at the same time, it is highly strategic because the hazard placement is so central on every hole.  Check out the spine on the 1st green, a blind, downhill short par three opener.  Or try the rough area on the second shot of the par four 6th.  The tongue protruding from the top tier on the wild 8th green is a beauty.  The grass bunkering on 13 is very elegant and leads to a very deceptive green.  The 16th is a beautiful short par five, with two craters confronting the player head-on on both full shots.  Finally, the 17th features a push-up green that makes a tiny par four very scary.

Huntercombe is essential for a study in low-profile architecture.  This course could be replicated anywhere without excessive funds, and it, more than any course I have seen, should serve as a model for modern golf courses.  Oh, and it is a very walkable course with a very cool routing.

As an aside, I think a couple of your pictures are mislabeled.  Your fourth photo looks like the 4th green, and the seventh photo appears to be 16 from the fairway.

[Brent Hutto]

Huntercombe is essential for a study in low-profile architecture.  This course could be replicated anywhere without excessive funds, and it, more than any course I have seen, should serve as a model for modern golf courses.  Oh, and it is a very walkable course with a very cool routing.

And it is a failed housing-development course. A very timely thing, that.

[JNC Lyon]

Huntercombe is essential for a study in low-profile architecture.  This course could be replicated anywhere without excessive funds, and it, more than any course I have seen, should serve as a model for modern golf courses.  Oh, and it is a very walkable course with a very cool routing.

And it is a failed housing-development course. A very timely thing, that.

I always thought it was strange that Huntercombe seems to be such a low-budget affair, yet Willie Park, Jr. lost all of his money during the construction.  Remember, though, Huntercombe was built in 1901, and it is one of the first (if not THE first) great parkland course in the world.  Today, I'm sure, a course like Huntercombe would be very inexpensive relative to the grandiose layouts of the age.

[Sean_A]

THe 7th photo looks like the 13th to me.

Ciao

[JNC Lyon]

Sean, correct you are.  Both holes are among my favorites on the course.

[Scott Macpherson]

LNC, Sean,

Thanks. I did have 2 photos mislabelled. You passed the test!

The 7th is correct though. It's the long par 3 (213y). I noted the course is only 6301 yards from the tips, but that is more than enough for most people.

I found the story about how the Clubhouse had been moved, and the routing renumber interesting. i.e what is now hole 13 was 18, and what is now hole 1 was hole 6. That explains why the 1st hole is a par 3. (NB- the club did trial playing off the current 6th hole as their 1st hole for 6 months but preferred to start off the par 3)

scott

[Mark_Rowlinson]

I'm not saying that the two courses are comparable, but in terms of artificial feature Royal Mid-Surrey is worth a look, too. You couldn't dig down much or you would be into the water table, and the course is still liable to flooding and dampness in winter, but it, too, is a study in effective minimalism.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()