Creative solution #2: why not let the New host St Andrews' Open Championship?

[Mark Bourgeois]

Who is willing / able to take us hole by hole on the New from the perspective of hosting an Open? Arble?

It's, like, 10 times harder than the Old. 6,625 yards from the whites -- how much farther back can they go on the course and how many yards outside the course could they find by using combo tees from the Old / Jubilee?

Lots of gorse but viewing stands can see over those, easy.

(nb creative solution #1 was why not let hollow on 7 become a bunker?)

[Tony_Muldoon]

Not a chance unless you added tees on The Himalyas, Old, and Jubilee for starters.

http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,42823.0.html



Creative solution no 3
Wasn't the unloved Jubilee redesigned to Championship length even though which won was in mind for it?


Creative Solution no 4
Also somewhere in these back pages Tom MacWood started a thread about a course that was proposed (I think) in the 1930's usng the best land from the Old and the New.


The Solution
Roll back and play it only on the Old Course, just like they always used to.

[Mark Pearce]

I imagine that a composite course, starting somewhere near the new clubhouse and using holes from New, Jubilee and Old and ending on TOC 18 could be created which would have the required length and difficulty. 

[Brett Hochstein]

Not much elasticity on the New.  Many of the tee boxes are right behind the greens, especially on the early holes, where sometimes you might have to putt through a group teeing off.  There may be some other spots to chip away at getting a higher distance total, but I am not sure you can get to whatever number the committee would like.  I would love to see how the pros would do on that course though, as it aligns in style more closely to the other courses in the rota, sans the distance.

I've always wondered what one could come up with having a clean slate over the St Andrews peninsula.  There is so much good ground out there as well as opportunities to feature the water and dunes more.  Obviously, I am glad it is not that way and wouldn't want to try. Interesting to think about though.

[Terry Lavin]

Can't imagine that anybody who has any power over the decisionmaking process at St. Andrews would be interested in doing anything that would remove its most famous property from the most famous championship in the world.  They want to make money there, don't they?  Enjoy your Socratic moment on this issue, but it isn't ever going to happen.

[Mark Bourgeois]

And here we are:

Strokesaver Guide to the 2020 Open:
"A premium is placed on driving with an advantage suitably conferred upon the long and straight hitter. The truly creative (not to mention short & accurate) golfer may choose the "B Route:" drive his tee shot up the fairway of 2nd Old, which never is out of bounds. The B Route confers a clear line of sight upon he who controls his distance -- never an easy thing on a links -- but beware the impregnable quadrilateral of four bunkers on the Old!

nb For the Open, viewing stands have not been placed to the left of this hole for this purpose. We apologise to those hoping for a view out to the sea.



Works pretty well, actually.

Who's got the 2nd hole?

Terry, I prefer the term elenchus. Anyway, to paraphrase Mencken, nobody ever went broke underestimating the tastes of the American golfer. You tell 'em they're playing an Open course, they're coming.

[Terry Lavin]

Mark,

I'm guessing that if you tell them they can play an Open course that's had a green changed, a couple bunkers added and some mounding removed, they'll still come and play that, too, even if they can only play it at 6400 yards.  But I'm not addressing the intelligence of the average American golfer, rather, I'm suggesting that this exercise is much ado about nothing that will ever be done, because the Links Trust and the R&A will continue to trot out the Old Course for the Open every chance they get, because it's great for business, much in the way that Pebble Beach wants to host the US Open every six or seven years.  It's great for business.  I doubt that they'd consider transforming Spyglass Hill so they could keep Pebble "pure" for the purists.  I think a similar motivation exists for the Merions of the private club world in the US.  They want to try to remain immortal in a sense of the word and the way they choose to seek it is to do whatever they have to do in order to host a US Open.

Contrarily, I don't think keeping a famous golf course as a sort of living museum is a good business model.  I kind of like the idea since I'm fool enough to be seduced by the timelessness of such a concept, but I think there isn't a big enough market to keep a museum course open, unless, of course, it is subsidized by the government.