[Cory Brown]

I stumbled across this Australian golf website with a Golf Architecture forum http://forums.iseekgolf.com/forums/37-golf-architecture/topics/51910-melbournes-sand-belts-are-they-overated

A couple thoughts I had after reading this.
1. Do Australians not appreciate what they have because the courses are right in their own back yard?
2. What do great views have to do with golf architecture?
3. Is this the opinion of "Retail Golfers" that a courses beauty determines its quality?
4. Lastly, are they right?

[David Davis]

Funny this, never heard anyone outside of Australia ever question if the sandbelt courses are overrated. If anything I'd say underrated I suppose. I think those courses are simply brilliant, super fun and test all aspects of your game. Some of the most challenging putting in the entire world and fastest greens as well. I'm fall in the category that found KH better than RM. However, RM was suffering from the drought when I was there and the course was totally burned up as they did not have their own water supply. While the routing was great I still didn't think it was better than KH. I also played the composite course as the member I was with just took me through it since it was quiet.

I tend to see the ranking as bogus as well, these would be the rankings outside of the US as seen by the Americans for the most part, but I know someone will comment on how the committee is also made up of some international people. Mostly it's Americans and therefore the list will be US centric even if it's not covering the US. The world rankings are naturally US centric and it's a whole other thread to discuss if that holds any water whatsoever outside the US. I don't want to start a war here though. As mentioned I question honestly if any parkland courses belong in the top courses in the world....

As to the questions below:

1. perhaps they do not, the grass is always greener...although the answer of a couple people are not enough to draw conclusions about Australians in general. I would hope, if they have managed to play those courses they appreciate how great they are.
2. Great views alone probably very little, seeing as how low Old Head is rated among Irish courses I guess they don't. Combine amazing architecture with amazing views and you have Cypress Point. In that case the answer has to be yes for me.
3. To ignore the beauty and the impact it has would have to be sheer blindness.
4. I suppose I've answered this already for me above.

[Michael Goldstein]

David, I believe Geoff Shac said the same thing and he isn't an Aussie. 

I tend to agree and I'm not either!

There was an article in golf digest recently that is directly on point: http://planetgolf.com.au/index.php?id=1594

[David_Elvins]

Cory,

Yes, they are overated. Darius and Shack, are relatively spot on. But please don't go reading that website, it will damage your brain.

[David Davis]

Michael, as a good Kiwi you are supposed to agree that the sandbelt courses are overrated ;-)

I must admit to not having played them all. I've only played RM, KH, Victoria and the Metropolitan. I'd say I really loved all four of them. I can't remember having the feeling that they were cluttered with trees either but I played in 2006 I believe so perhaps all this links golf is getting to my memory. I just don't remember trees coming much into play and I remember thinking the fairways were all quite wide and generous give or take a couple hundred bunkers.

Interesting article although the 4 courses I played were the ones he liked it seems. I'm also not familiar with him, his site or his opinions really however, if he's that opinionated about the sandbelt I'd be curious to hear what he things of other golf destinations.

Melbourne has at least a couple courses in anyone's top 30 in the world so you can't really argue about it's place in the top of the world's golfing cities. Can you?

[Mark Chaplin]

Golf Digest has NSW as No.1 is Australia, whilst NSW is a very fine course and at its best its brilliant but it has too many weaknesses for me.  3, 6 (wasted opportunity), 15 (too narrow).

[David_Elvins]

Golf Digest has NSW as No.1 is Australia, whilst NSW is a very fine course and at its best its brilliant but it has too many weaknesses for me.  3, 6 (wasted opportunity), 15 (too narrow).

NSW is more overrated than the sandbelt.

[Scott Warren]

NSW is a lovely place to play golf and is a very, very good golf course. However, at 34 (from memory) in the most recent Golf Mag world poll, it's remarkably overrated. Especially after the recent changes.

I can't say the Sandbelt is overrated necessarily. RM and KH are as good as everyone says and for mine a course like Peninsula (North) is significantly underrated.

Metro may not be all some have said in the recent past (it cracked the world 100, I believe), but it's a bloody good golf course -- especially for the land it is on.

If the quality of all golf courses were divided by the quality of their land, the Sandbelt would be even more highly regarded.

[Jason Topp]

They may not be as good as they could be, as the article suggests, but I hardly think the courses are overrated.

[Matthew Mollica]

I think they are over-rated a touch. RM is world Top 10, and KH is very very good, as is Victoria.

BUT

I'm not sure anyone would travel from overseas to play more than 4 or 5 of the courses within the region,
and depending upon definition, there's more than a dozen courses in the sandbelt.

And, as Geoff says, they aren't presented as well as they could be.

MM

[Anthony Butler]

After reading 2) in the original post, I knew it was only a matter of time before this turned into a NSW bashing thread...

Now back to the original point...

We don't seem to have a proper relationship established between under-appreciated and over-rated here....

The longer some of the qualities of sand-belt courses are 'under-appreciated' by those whose job it is to protect and enhance these qualities (the committees at each club) the sooner the courses on the sand-belt will be over-rated. Once the rot settles in at the second tier of courses... i.e. where the Huntingdales, the Commonwealths etc. have completely lost touch with the playing characteristics that make Sandbelt golf so good, the Region as a whole will suffer... and be compared less to a place like Long Island and more to somewhere like Chicago or any other large metropolitan area that has a couple of standout courses and a bunch of also-rans.

Considering how Melbourne as a whole rested on its laurels for the second half of the 20th century while Sydney mowed its lawn, stole its lunch and generally made Melbourne its girlfriend while on the way to becoming the only significant global city in Australia, you'd have to say the above scenario is at least a decent possibility.

[Mark_F]

KH is very very good, as is Victoria.

Jeez, no wonder people think the place is overrated.

[Jeff_Brauer]

I spent a lifetime wishing I could go to Australia and play those courses, esp. the most famous at Royal Melbourne.  When I got there, I felt they were at least as good as my imagination had conjoured up.  And, the other courses were surprisingly good.  

I am the type who tends to be dissapointed in any movie (or golf course) that has a lot of hype, so to not be dissapointed at all just increased my love of those courses.

I also learned a lot about Mac and how they sought to make courses playable yet great tests.  I played RM, a world top 10 in almost any book, three times with my hundred plus shooting wife, and we never exceeded 2:45 Minutes of total playing time, including, one round following the ladies league.  I don't recall losing a golf ball.  It may have been my first relatively untouched Mac course, and I did look past the history and fame (although I do love that about RM) to see why the architecture made the course so enjoyable.  It convinced me to be certain I had my greens and tees together, use light rough and build better looking bunkers, among other things.

IMHO, those courses are not overated, and anyone who does so might be dissapointed that they aren't tougher than they are in normal play, but that to me was part of the beauty of those courses.

[Andrew Summerell]

The best of the Sandbelt is definitely worth it, but as a group the Sandbelt is overrated. If Royal Melbourne & Kingston Heath did not exist the Sandbelt would not be spoken about around the world of golf. As good as courses like Victoria & Metro are, golfers wouldn’t travel thousands of miles to play them.

The Sandbelt has accessibility & localisation on its side, however if it was ranked as an area there maybe be 7 or 8 areas around the world that would rank ahead of it.

[David Davis]

I just can't understand how it could be overrated yet everyone agrees it already has two of the Top 30 courses in the world. I mean give me a break. Tell me another area that can say that let alone could be classified as overrated? Add to that Metro and Vic and with in a short drive The National how could it be overrated. I'd like to know where you guys are from and how many of you are Aussies. Just to see if anyone saying it's overrated is from overseas. The only place from a pure ranking perspective that's comparable would be Monterey Peninsula. Never heard anyone say that was overrated, or perhaps New York...

Add to the mix what an amazing city Melbourne is, the fact that the toilets flush in the opposite direction and they drive on the wrong side of the road, some of the friendliest bread thieves you'll ever meet as well as course accessibility, great weather almost guaranteed in summer time and Bells Beach close by, a national bird the size of a grown man that doesn't fly and the fact that I actually saw kangaroos boxing in the wild and I'm sorry but now it's just become the most underrated golf destination on the planet. Now please try and argue with that.

[David_Elvins]

I just can't understand how it could be overrated yet everyone agrees it already has two of the Top 30 courses in the world. I mean give me a break. Tell me another area that can say that let alone could be classified as overrated?

Plenty of people would not agree with the ranking of Kingston Heath in the top 30 courses in the world.  It is far from a consensus opinion that it is justly rated.  (From my relatively limited experience it isn't close to being Top 50). 

Add to that Metro and Vic and with in a short drive The National how could it be overrated. I'd like to know where you guys are from and how many of you are Aussies. Just to see if anyone saying it's overrated is from overseas. The only place from a pure ranking perspective that's comparable would be Monterey Peninsula. Never heard anyone say that was overrated, or perhaps New York...

You are forgetting the Surrey Heathlands, areas of Scotland such as Fyfe and Bandon Oregon.  The National isn't i nthe sandbelt, BTW.

Add to the mix what an amazing city Melbourne is, the fact that the toilets flush in the opposite direction.

This is incorrect, the direction the toilet flushes is due to local factors such as the shape of the bowl, and not any hemispherical pull. 

Now please try and argue with that.

The sandbelt lacks the depth of top quality courses that areas of London, Scotland, Long Island and California has.  Royal Melbourne West can never be underated but behind that, Kingston Heath is the only course that is definitely better than a "Doak 6"*.  Victoria and Royal Melbourne East are probably above this but I am sure an argument could be made against this. 

For the region to be amongst the world's best, it needs, IMO a few more Doak 8s*.  There is potential for courses like Commonwealth,  Peninsula, Metro, Victoria, Woodlands, to achieve this but they ain't there yet, IMO. 

*Apologies to Mr Doak for misapproriating his ranking system.

[David Davis]

Plenty of people would not agree with the ranking of Kingston Heath in the top 30 courses in the world.  It is far from a consensus opinion that it is justly rated.  (From my relatively limited experience it isn't close to being Top 50). 


DD: I can't argue with the fact that plenty of people might state this no more than I can access the relative knowledge and expertise of this group of people. So I'm sure your statement is true. However, and I don't have anything else to go by than my own experience of playing all these courses, most of the rankings seem to think it is in the Top 30. I've played over half of them myself self and I'd certainly agree but again I'm certainly not asking you to take my word for it. However don't forget there are also plenty of people that would agree it seems.

Add to that Metro and Vic and with in a short drive The National how could it be overrated. I'd like to know where you guys are from and how many of you are Aussies. Just to see if anyone saying it's overrated is from overseas. The only place from a pure ranking perspective that's comparable would be Monterey Peninsula. Never heard anyone say that was overrated, or perhaps New York...

You are forgetting the Surrey Heathlands, areas of Scotland such as Fyfe and Bandon Oregon.  The National isn't i nthe sandbelt, BTW.

DD why would you think I'm forgetting anything in my assessment? I didn't say anything about those places. The argument is whether or not the Sanbelt is overrated right? The National is 2 hours away and certainly not in the sandbelt which I didn't infer but it's still close by and adds to the overall destination in my view.

Add to the mix what an amazing city Melbourne is, the fact that the toilets flush in the opposite direction.

This is incorrect, the direction the toilet flushes is due to local factors such as the shape of the bowl, and not any hemispherical pull. 

DD David, I'm only being smart here for argument sake. However, please requote what I said, where did I suggest why the toilets flush in the opposite direction? I didn't so it doesn't matter why, they just do. (plus that was sarcastic of course, as if there are not already enough great reasons to head to OZ and visit the Sandbelt during your trip).

[/quote]

The sandbelt lacks the depth of top quality courses that areas of London, Scotland, Long Island and California has.  Royal Melbourne West can never be underated but behind that, Kingston Heath is the only course that is definitely better than a "Doak 6"*.  Victoria and Royal Melbourne East are probably above this but I am sure an argument could be made against this. 

DD ok we have to make up our minds here what we are comparing. London is a rather large city and we are talking about an area, "the Sand Belt" which I don't think is all that big, although I could be wrong, it just seemed to my like all the courses I played were within a few minutes of each other. Scotland was an entire country the last time I checked and Cali was a state both are fairly large areas to compare with one small area of the Sand Belt.

You mentioned Mr. Doak. I'm perhaps the only guy on this site that is not privileged enough to own a copy of and have read his book. My bad, I guess I'm waiting for him to finish the redo. It's not by choice that I haven't, it's an access issue. However that beings said, you are using him to validate your argument while interestingly enough so does the Sandbelt. Please humor me by taking a look at this website. Just the front page will do. www.thesandbelt.com at this moment the irony is easing it's way into the subject of this thread.

As far as England goes, I'm a big fan of English golf, however, that's not the argument here. Nor is the fact that England has 0 courses in the top 30. The Sandbelt has 2. Bandon Dunes is holy ground and is the best golf resort in the world I'm sure, it has one thanks to Mr. Doak. Otherwise it might have none.


For the region to be amongst the world's best, it needs, IMO a few more Doak 8s*.  There is potential for courses like Commonwealth,  Peninsula, Metro, Victoria, Woodlands, to achieve this but they ain't there yet, IMO. 

*Apologies to Mr Doak for misapproriating his ranking system.
[/quote]

DD, that's fair enough, I won't argue with anything you say is your opinion. It seems that there are those in the know that believe America for example would have much better golf course architecture if the Sandbelt where much closer. that's quite a compliment and certainly not something I would called worthy of being overrated. You? Where are you from?

[David_Elvins]

However don't forget there are also plenty of people that would agree it seems.

For sure, however i think there is a big difference between "everyone agrees" (your previous post) and "Plenty of people that would agree" (this post).

DD why would you think I'm forgetting anything in my assessment? I didn't say anything about those places.

I know, you said "The only place from a pure ranking perspective that's comparable would be Monterey Peninsula", hence me pointing out that you had forgotten a few places. 

DD ok we have to make up our minds here what we are comparing. London is a rather large city and we are talking about an area, "the Sand Belt" which I don't think is all that big, although I could be wrong, it just seemed to my like all the courses I played were within a few minutes of each other. Scotland was an entire country the last time I checked and Cali was a state both are fairly large areas to compare with one small area of the Sand Belt.

I did say "areas" of California, London and Scotland.  Work out the size of the sandbelt and overlaying it on areas of scotland, london, long island, california, etc would be a fair comparison.

You mentioned Mr. Doak. I'm perhaps the only guy on this site that is not privileged enough to own a copy of and have read his book. My bad, I guess I'm waiting for him to finish the redo. It's not by choice that I haven't, it's an access issue. However that beings said, you are using him to validate your argument...

To be honest with you, I am apprpriating his ratings very poorly.  In the past he ranked a few of the sandbelt courses higher than what i stated.

As far as England goes, I'm a big fan of English golf, however, that's not the argument here. Nor is the fact that England has 0 courses in the top 30. The Sandbelt has 2.

In your mind would you rank Kingston Heath as better than Sunningdale? 

It seems that there are those in the know that believe America for example would have much better golf course architecture if the Sandbelt where much closer. that's quite a compliment and certainly not something I would called worthy of being overrated.

If the sandbelt cannot have any discernable influence on Sydney architecture, I am not sure in the validity of that statement.  I think the sandbelt has some great attributes however some are, imo, more hype than substance.  For example, the great width on display at Royal Melbourne is not seen on some of the other sandbelt courses.  Commonwealth, for example, could be a world top 100 course however the fairways average about 20 yards wide.   Natural vegetation is another great strength of the sandbelt however many courses do not get this right.  Firm and fast conditions - too many courses are having problems with their grassing and greens and it limits courses ability to play 'firm and fast'.

Where are you from?

Melbourne

[Michael Goldstein]

DD, don't get me wrong Melbourne is an epic golfing city.  Both RM and KH are world class - the best 2 courses in Australia and probably in the top 20 world.  Victoria is also in that "8" echelon which is worth traveling for.  Overrated is the wrong word perhaps but agree that sandbelt may be a misnomer at times.
 

[Anthony Butler]

I did say "areas" of California, London and Scotland.  Work out the size of the sandbelt and overlaying it on areas of scotland, london, long island, california, etc would be a fair comparison.

I'm thinking about this statement and how it applies to the other areas you mentioned... The Monterey Penninsula probably has the Sandbelt covered at the top end in an even smaller-sized area. I haven't played enough courses out there, but Long Island has three courses inside Kingston Heath... LA and SF only have two world class courses in a similar area. The London Heathland has Melbourne covered for both quality and quantity... You could reasonably say Berkshire Red is about the sixth best course in the Heathland and that is a better golfing experience than Metropolitan or Huntingdale.

As far as Scotland goes, perhaps the area around St. Andrews. The other areas are still larger than the sandbelt's geographic footprint.

[Scott Warren]

As for comparable areas that arguably outperform Melbourne, we can start with the east end of Long Island, Westchester and the western part of Long Island, San Francisco, Monterey, Philadelphia, Bergen County NJ and surrounds, Surrey and Berkshire outside London (collectively if not both individually), East Lothian, Fife, Southport, Boston.

Some of those don't have their courses in as close proximity as is the case in Melbourne, but many do.

Surrey and Berkshire, for example, boasts about 15-20 of the GB&I Top 100.

Melbourne is wonderful and its four or five best courses are extraordinary, but it ain't Robinson Crusoe.

[Chip Gaskins]

Royal Melbourne is the best golf course on the planet.  It has the best golf ground, period.

Caveat, not played Dornach or Seminole but of the rest, RM is the best.

[Anthony Butler]

As for comparable areas that arguably outperform Melbourne, we can start with the east end of Long Island, Westchester and the western part of Long Island, San Francisco, Monterey, Philadelphia, Bergen County NJ and surrounds, Surrey and Berkshire outside London (collectively if not both individually), East Lothian, Fife, Southport, Boston.

Some of those don't have their courses in as close proximity as is the case in Melbourne, but many do.

Surrey and Berkshire, for example, boasts about 15-20 of the GB&I Top 100.

Melbourne is wonderful and its four or five best courses are extraordinary, but it ain't Robinson Crusoe.

Hi Scott... Totally onboard with most of your locations.. but don't you think Boston might be a stretch? TCC, Boston Golf Glub, Charles River., maybe Winchester.. after that things get pretty dicey.. Essex County Club as an example is a good thirty miles from TCC...

[Matthew Delahunty]

I think this requires the next GCA Boomerang be held on the Sandbelt so our foreign GCA cousins can reach an informed consensus

[Scott Warren]

Matthew, I agree. A Sandbelt Boomerang would be great, though maybe not the easiest to organise!

Anthony, I decided to put the cue in the rack when I got to Boston, I thought my next few candidates would be stretching things a bit.

I admit to not knowing the exact geography of the courses there, but thought TCC, Essex, Myopia, BGC, Olde Sandwich, Eastward Ho! and maybe Charles River and TPC Boston were a fairly strong group representing greater Boston.

Obviously not nearly as closely grouped as the Sandbelt, but nonetheless they represent a major city's golf offerings and you could comfortably play one a day for a week while staying in the same hotel room each night.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()