I'm not including the sea, beach or ocean itself in this, I'm thinking about the various ponds that crop up on links courses.
We've recently had discussions regarding the pond on 14 and 15 at the Eden course at St Andrews and another that always gets mentioned is the pond on 17 at Royal County Down. I also came across a small pond on 10 at Littlestone recently.
I get the impression that the collective opinion is that they are bad design and out of character? I've commented along these lines myself, specifically with regards to the pond on the Eden course. However, is this always the case?
On the Eden course thread...
http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,49924.0.htmlThomas Kelly mentions that the location of the pond was an area that naturally flooded on a regular basis.
There is a water hazard at Burnham & Berrow that starts out looking like a pond by the 7 green and then becomes more of a stream along the 8 fairway. And yet this is a
low lying area with
a high water table, and so water in this area is not out of place to me? Is it possible that this is the case with other such hated ponds on the links, such as the one on 17 at RCD? And are all the streams and burns we see crossing links courses, in fact streams or just wet areas? I'm thinking of the streams on 1 and 18 at Royal Cinque Ports for instance? Are these wet low lying areas that have been formalised to look like streams to blend in more with what is considered acceptable???
With so many famous streams or burns, I'm thinking The Barry and Swilken Burns for instance, the principal of water hazards on links courses isn't an alien one when its a natural feature, and virtually all links course do follow the natural / minimalist sort of principals?
I'd be interested to hear your thoughts?
Cheers,
James