Trump Scotland #2

[Niall C]

Here's the proposed routing:

http://golfweek.com/news/2013/feb/11/trump-reveals-routing-second-course-scotland/

As has become usual around these parts, I'm sure most of the regular Trump-haters will condemn everything about this plan for a second course, miss the point, spout out vitriol, and waste space on this thread. On the other hand most any of us who've seen the property and or have played the existing course will likely be excited to focus on Hawtree's most interesting proposed routing.

The use of pastoral land to take you in and out of the dunescape will seem like an aesthetic sandwich with "double meat" in the middle. Holes 5 through 16 will be set amidst those towering dunes that dominate the property and include several holes with multiple and split fairways, double greens, drivable par fours, and double-doglegs....all features any reasonable fan of GCA should wish for. The lack of returning nines seems mandated by the desire to maximize the preferable terrain. 3 holes will be directly seaside and likely offer lovely visuals. The dunes are massive down there and will wreck havoc with the winds that are plentiful and multi-directional.

I, for one, look forward to seeing this course built and argue that no matter what you think of Donald Trump, he's giving us golfers the potential for yet another very, very good course that promises to offer equal doses of golfing pleasure and pain....just the prescription I seek in Scottish links.

As is usual round here, the raters who have been comped are happy to give the course a boost before its even been built................not that I would say that 

Steve,

I think the first point that should be said, is that the nature of this site is that its about frank and free discussion on all matters relating to gca. Often discussion centres on the theoretical but sometimes on actual courses/holes or whatever and its perfectly acceptable to comment on the topic by means of reference to photos even though you haven't seen the course in person. That, I think is accepted by majority on here.

The second point is that not all critics haven't seen the property and equally not all of those that have played the course would rate it anywhere as highly as some of the mags, and certainly not as highly as the owner.

Having said that, I think the second course perhaps has more potential than the first just because it  isn't hemmed in by the giant dunes you refer to. Playing through giant dunes on flattened fairways doesn't inspire me the same way that playing over and on top off, or off smaller dunes does. Did you manage to play Silloth when you were over last year ? A great example of what I mean.

Niall

[Mark Chaplin]

Steve - my point about jobs is valid, the project would never have got the green light without Government support, this support was on the back of the economic benefit to Scotland not just a small corner of Aberdeenshire. There is always a weight up between the rights of locals and protected land over the greater good to the economy. We are currently having this debate around a new high speed train line between London-Midlands-Northern England.

The Trump project has the opportunity to be of great benefit to Scotland and the local economy in which case it will be deemed a success.

You clearly enjoyed the experience, was it worth your £180 for a round?

[Steve Lapper]

Here's the proposed routing:

http://golfweek.com/news/2013/feb/11/trump-reveals-routing-second-course-scotland/

As has become usual around these parts, I'm sure most of the regular Trump-haters will condemn everything about this plan for a second course, miss the point, spout out vitriol, and waste space on this thread. On the other hand most any of us who've seen the property and or have played the existing course will likely be excited to focus on Hawtree's most interesting proposed routing.

The use of pastoral land to take you in and out of the dunescape will seem like an aesthetic sandwich with "double meat" in the middle. Holes 5 through 16 will be set amidst those towering dunes that dominate the property and include several holes with multiple and split fairways, double greens, drivable par fours, and double-doglegs....all features any reasonable fan of GCA should wish for. The lack of returning nines seems mandated by the desire to maximize the preferable terrain. 3 holes will be directly seaside and likely offer lovely visuals. The dunes are massive down there and will wreck havoc with the winds that are plentiful and multi-directional.

I, for one, look forward to seeing this course built and argue that no matter what you think of Donald Trump, he's giving us golfers the potential for yet another very, very good course that promises to offer equal doses of golfing pleasure and pain....just the prescription I seek in Scottish links.

As is usual round here, the raters who have been comped are happy to give the course a boost before its even been built................not that I would say that 

Steve,

I think the first point that should be said, is that the nature of this site is that its about frank and free discussion on all matters relating to gca. Often discussion centres on the theoretical but sometimes on actual courses/holes or whatever and its perfectly acceptable to comment on the topic by means of reference to photos even though you haven't seen the course in person. That, I think is accepted by majority on here.

The second point is that not all critics haven't seen the property and equally not all of those that have played the course would rate it anywhere as highly as some of the mags, and certainly not as highly as the owner.

Having said that, I think the second course perhaps has more potential than the first just because it  isn't hemmed in by the giant dunes you refer to. Playing through giant dunes on flattened fairways doesn't inspire me the same way that playing over and on top off, or off smaller dunes does. Did you manage to play Silloth when you were over last year ? A great example of what I mean.

Niall

Niall,

   Being comped as a rater HAS NOTHING TO DO with giving this course a boost before its even been built!!! That's patently absurd.  I walked the property lines  last summer with the club's super, John Bambury, and think there are some very neat features that will translate into great golf holes. That's the sole source of my opinion.
   I'm all for freedom of speech and opinion. Say whatever you want about a course, even if its only your perception of one-dimensional photographs. Just don't expect such an opinion or comment to carry the same validity for critical consideration as those gleaned from a physical visit.
 
   What's interesting to me is that a great many (dare I say super-majority?) of very knowledgable and otherwise impartial critics who have walked the property or played the course have come away with very positive reviews. The likes of Brad Klein, Joe Passov, Geoff Shackleford, David Baum,  Jerry Tardeand Peter Dawson have all agreed that it is an excellent course.  Darius Oliver, while the most critical of all the reasonably described experts,  thought it was "beautiful property" and had "obvious quality." All of the aforementioned found some faults (as did I), and none waxed as effusively as Trump has. I suspect these guys have collectively played way more courses around the world than most of those you allude to. As pained as it might be for some who despise the Donald, the fact is that the course is pretty impressive.

  I am excited by the second course because some of the architectural features I see on the routing map look intriguing when I imagine set amid, between, above and adjacent to those spectacular dunes.  Yes, I've played Siloth (years back) and see your point, but I like the drama found at Balmeadie. Just one man's (first-hand) opinion.

[Steve Lapper]

Steve - my point about jobs is valid, the project would never have got the green light without Government support, this support was on the back of the economic benefit to Scotland not just a small corner of Aberdeenshire. There is always a weight up between the rights of locals and protected land over the greater good to the economy. We are currently having this debate around a new high speed train line between London-Midlands-Northern England.

The Trump project has the opportunity to be of great benefit to Scotland and the local economy in which case it will be deemed a success.

You clearly enjoyed the experience, was it worth your £180 for a round?

Mark,

   I don't challenge your point about the jobs. I just self-adjusted the likely real number of produced jobs. Given the polarization produced by this project (and I don't pass judgement on either side of that one), don't you think the hiring of security guards prudent?

   Yes, I would say it would be well worth the expenditure, especially when compared to the Greens fees charged over here for the likes of Whistling Straights, Sea Island, Pebble Beach, et.al.

[Tony_Muldoon]

Bearing in mind this course weaves it's way round the most contentious parcel of land, not the SSI but Mr Forbes gaff, this will not be built quietly.

Three predictions.

1 Mr Trump will continue to inflame the situation for his own ends.   

2 Mr Forbes will suffer as he will be piggy in the middle between a guy who is impervious to his feelings and a better organised, but equally ineffective,  protest group.

3 Mr Muldoon won't be playing this one either.

[Bryan Izatt]

Mark,

Sadly the fee is now £195 weekdays and £215 weekends.


Steve,

Is it well worth it as a once and done experience or for multiple plays.  It may be "value" compared to some of the more egregious rates in the USA.  But, is it a "value" proposition vis-a-vis other Scottish links courses - TOC, Carnoustie, Cruden Bay, North Berwick, Prestwick, Royal Dornoch, etc?

[Bryan Izatt]

Here is the plan.  As Tony says, Mr Forbes is stuck right in the middle (red bounded area).

[Steve Lapper]

Mark,

Sadly the fee is now £195 weekdays and £215 weekends.


Steve,

Is it well worth it as a once and done experience or for multiple plays.  It may be "value" compared to some of the more egregious rates in the USA.  But, is it a "value" proposition vis-a-vis other Scottish links courses - TOC, Carnoustie, Cruden Bay, North Berwick, Prestwick, Royal Dornoch, etc?

"Value" compared to the TOC, Royal Dornoch, Cruden Bay, North Berwick, or Prestwick....maybe not so much? I'd much rather play Trump multiple times than Carnoustie though. I find "Carnasty" to have some splendid holes, but far too many unmemorable pedestrian ones to leave it worthy of much "value." Just another man's opinion. PS...why no mention of the rates at Turnberry or Muirfield?

[Mark Chaplin]

Steve - good question, Muirfield and Turnberry have held multiple Open Championships so have considerable pedigree. Demand means Muirfield is sold out every summer as there are only two visitor days per week.

[Bryan Izatt]

Here's the proposed routing:

http://golfweek.com/news/2013/feb/11/trump-reveals-routing-second-course-scotland/

As has become usual around these parts, I'm sure most of the regular Trump-haters will condemn everything about this plan for a second course, miss the point, spout out vitriol, and waste space on this thread. On the other hand most any of us who've seen the property and or have played the existing course will likely be excited to focus on Hawtree's most interesting proposed routing.

The use of pastoral land to take you in and out of the dunescape will seem like an aesthetic sandwich with "double meat" in the middle.

"Pastoral land" - if by that you have in mind the flattish farmers' fields inland of the dunes, I would think that that area of the course is rather dull land.  It looks like that it will be the site of holes 1 - 5 as well as 12 - 14.  Holes 15 - 18 appear to be beside the large dunes and the flat farmers fields.  And, yes, I've been there. Holes 6 through 11 will certainly be in the large dunes at the south end.  

Holes 5 through 16 will be set amidst those towering dunes that dominate the property and include several holes with multiple and split fairways, double greens, drivable par fours, and double-doglegs....all features any reasonable fan of GCA should wish for.

There look like some interesting features.  The 5th looks a little disjointed and the use of ponds on a couple of holes seems kind of un-links-like.

The lack of returning nines seems mandated by the desire to maximize the preferable terrain. 3 holes will be directly seaside and likely offer lovely visuals. The dunes are massive down there and will wreck havoc with the winds that are plentiful and multi-directional.

If you are referring to 9, 10 and 11 as seaside, I think that is somewhat misleading.  They'll be inside the seaside dunes line.  Perhaps the sea will be visible from elevated tees, since Trump seems to like elevated tees.  Agree on the winds.

I, for one, look forward to seeing this course built and argue that no matter what you think of Donald Trump, he's giving us golfers the potential for yet another very, very good course that promises to offer equal doses of golfing pleasure and pain....just the prescription I seek in Scottish links.

Are there not enough very very good existing Scottish links courses already to fill your prescription at a more price?  Since I can't see paying the price relative to all the other existing links gems that are on offer, it really doesn't turn my crank whether this course goes ahead or not.  I am a bit saddened to see the dunescape being lost.

A couple of years ago, before work was begun on the first course, I walked the area that will be holes 6 through 11 of the second course.  It was then a public park.  Following are some pictures, for posterity, of what it looked like in 2010 starting from the south end and moving up north (most facing north).  I imagine that most golf architects would salivate at the sight of this site.  



















The aforementioned beach and sea on the other side of the dunes.






The green field over the moving dunes to the right edge of the picture is where holes 1 - 5 will go.




Looking back down to the south.

[Bryan Izatt]

Mark,

Sadly the fee is now £195 weekdays and £215 weekends.


Steve,

Is it well worth it as a once and done experience or for multiple plays.  It may be "value" compared to some of the more egregious rates in the USA.  But, is it a "value" proposition vis-a-vis other Scottish links courses - TOC, Carnoustie, Cruden Bay, North Berwick, Prestwick, Royal Dornoch, etc?

"Value" compared to the TOC, Royal Dornoch, Cruden Bay, North Berwick, or Prestwick....maybe not so much? I'd much rather play Trump multiple times than Carnoustie though. I find "Carnasty" to have some splendid holes, but far too many unmemorable pedestrian ones to leave it worthy of much "value." Just another man's opinion. PS...why no mention of the rates at Turnberry or Muirfield?

Steve,

I played Turnberry years ago and don't remember the price. We were staying in the hotel on my son's points, so perhaps the green fee wasn't too exorbitant at the time. Muirfield, I never been.  I'm not a fan of jacket and tie for lunch and I don't usually plan far enough ahead to even book it.  As I understood it, you get two rounds and lunch for whatever they charge.  What do they charge?

Last year, post Buda, I went to Royal Lytham and paid £265 (I think) but that included a night in the Dormie House and dinner and breakfast and lunch.  And, it had a certain pedigree.  And, they were very welcoming.  (Not to say that The Donald wouldn't be.    ).  For me that was enough value for a once and done.

I really enjoy Carnoustie when I want to get beat up a bit, but each to his own. 

With so many historical links courses on offer in Scotland, I just don't get the desire of many to play the new and very expensive links and faux lin

[Ally Mcintosh]

Have to say that looking at those photos have caused a tinge of sadness for me - I didn't realise Trump's land went as far south as the old Balmedie park and it's only when I cross-referenced with Google Earth that I understood how close the first course was. I used to spend a lot of time on those dunes as a kid. Furthermore, it means the new holes will be built either on farmland or on another sand dome which was the closest thing to a real desert I'd ever seen (as a nipper)... Anyway, that means the holes will have to be "created" a little more than I had hoped...

[Bryan Izatt]

Ally,

As far as I can tell, the course will extend all the way down to just barely north of the car park.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Steve Lapper,

If Mike Keiser was the developer and the same design for the second course was presented by Tom Doak, the salivating, euphoria and praise would be beyond containment.

Critical assessment by independent sources have indicated that the first course has a high degree of architectural merit, despite the whining complaints from many who have never played the course.

I hope the second course enjoys similar reviews.

The creation of good to great golf courses benefits golf and golfers.

[William_G]

it's just so unfortunate that it's a "trump"

William,

If it wasn't a "Trump" it wouldn't have been built.

You have to learn to take the good with the bad, the bitter with the sweet.

do I have to

[Patrick_Mucci]

Patrick unless he builds 30 mores courses in Aberdeen there will not be the 5000 jobs that caused the planning to be granted in the first place. Security guards seem to be doing well which is odd as a nice friendly community based project wouldn't need any!

Mark,

Let me ask you this.

If he never built the golf course/s and hotel, how many jobs would have been created ?

ZERO !

With two golf courses and the hotel how many jobs will have been created ?

If the residential phase is completed, how many more jobs will be created.

Net, would you rather that the site remain as it was with zero jobs or as it's proceeding with additional jobs ?

[Steve Lapper]

My Esteemed Colleagues from Across the Pond,

   Your most recent posts are constructive and important. Yes, the championship pedigrees of some wonderful Scottish links will always deserve to demand a luxury price and still offer value to any visitor.

    Yes, "pastoral land" meant flattish (but sloped) inland farmers field and that could suggest dull land, but I, like others, rather fancy the thought that Mr. Hawtree might give us solid links-like holes. With you on the ponds, but I wonder if they aren't necessary for some reason???

    I know the land along 9-11 will be inside the dunes line, but there might well be peeks (like existing #3 green complex)? Elevated tees?? Wouldn't it be nice if there weren't any there ?

    There are dozens of very good Scottish links that fill my prescription at lower prices, but I confess to like playing new places as well as old and love the high-stakes golfing drama amidst those dunes. That said, I am compassionate of your's and Ally's view about the loss of those dunes. If they were otherwise not already deeded into development, and attempting to be acquired exclusive of the existing course, I'd agree they should ideally be preserved. Fortunate only for the golfer, they appear to part and parcel of the Trump property .

    Brian...your pictures are wonderful and so revealing. Thank you for sharing them. "Value" is in the eye of the beholder's wallet. I know plenty who've happily forked over US$500 to play other man-made and carved courses like Shadow Creek and Escata. Plenty have paid as much to play Loch Lomand, Old Head or marked up prices for preferred times on TOC. As we both can say...to each his own.

 Pat....true dat

  Bottom line....it'll likely be some time until this 2nd course physically defines itself....let's just hope it's worthy of being "The 2nd Greatest Course Ever! " and we can all find something nice to say.


  

  

[Patrick_Mucci]

Mark, et., al.,

Won't the market determine if the price to play is reasonable ?

How is Trump different than Streamsong in terms of price to play ?

[Bryan Izatt]

Steve,

Just to clarify, I appreciate being called an Esteemed Colleague (more than being called a moron) but I'm not from Across the Pond (unless you consider Lake Ontario as a pond).   

I appreciate that there are many here and elsewhere for whom price is no object.  Such is life.

Yes, "pastoral land" meant flattish (but sloped) inland farmers field and that could suggest dull land, but I, like others, rather fancy the thought that Mr. Hawtree might give us solid links-like holes.

You need to stop saying that; you're undermining one of Pat's essential premises. 

I hope you (and Pat) aren't salivating for more holes like this one.   

 

[Patrick_Mucci]

Bryan,

Have you played the hole you pictured above ?

[Bryan Izatt]

Patrick,

No. Have you? Should it be called the Horseshoe hole or the Magnet hole or .......

[Patrick_Mucci]

Patrick,

No. Have you? Should it be called the Horseshoe hole or the Magnet hole or .......

Bryan,

No I haven't, but then again I didn't make a negative comment about the hole, but you did, so I was wondering what you found objectionable about it when you played it.

[Bryan Izatt]

Patrick,

I first wondered about the design of this hole back in 2008.

http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,37483.0.html

More recently those that have played the hole have described it as having a split fairway that makes no sense.  You can wade through your multitudinous posts on the following thread to find the comments of those that have played the hole.  Hint:  Look for Brad Klein amongst others.  The split fairway looked silly (IMHO) on the plan 4 years ago.  It seems those who have played it think likewise.  I respect their, on the ground, opinions (especially since they support my own).    You don't think the split fairway looks like a Magnet or a Horseshoe?

http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,52763.0.html

[Patrick_Mucci]

Bryan,

What it looks like from an aerial and how it plays are two separate issues, one not necessarily related to the other.

In addition, you always have to remember that naysayers tend to be more vocal than those that approve

[Ally Mcintosh]

Bryan,

I’m with Pat here. What can you tell from an aerial on such mountainous land?

That said, the split fairway doesn’t work in this instance but I’m sure it was attempted because of the low lying dune slack it surrounds… That’s not to say it couldn’t work with a bit of an extension but that option might need to be engineered so it was probably discarded.

You could argue that the green site doesn’t work either but it’s bold being almost completely hidden in a little dune dell.

So the bottom line is that it is a brave hole – one that doesn’t come off in my opinion – and should be applauded at least for that.

Seems to be a fine line whether these brave (quirky?) modern choices are applauded or castigated.