[Frank Pont]

I love both Machrihanish and Pennard, but for me Mach wins because its a more classic links and has some incredible organic greens (play the greens of MD the next day and you will see the big difference). Pennard is also incredibly varied, and has the best views of Europe, but has some topography that is just too extreme for my liking (holes 16 & 17). Mach's back nine is not as scenic as the front but I really like the holes. The let down are hole 17 and to lesser extent hole 18. Funny enough in discussions with Adam Lawrence I found out that we both had the same idea to combine 17 and 18 into a par 5 and fit a par 3 in somewhere earlier in the course....

[Sean_A]

Frank

I don't know what organic means in relation to greens, but the greens and sites at Pennard are very much undervalued.  There are several very good greens, including 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 11, 16 & 17.  Another aspect which may or not be valued is seemless transitions between fairway and greens.  Generally, Pennard does very well in this regard.  In my experience, Machrihanish tends to be quite a bit more hairy than Pennard thus reducing paly options.  I would agree that Pennard's terrain is ott for the 17th.  The reverse dogleg concept with such a slope working against the shape of the hole is dodgy and can ony be properly by serious fairway shaping.  The width after the hole turns is too narrow.  I am not overly keen on the hole, but strangely, many people think it is wonderful  .  I don't have any idea what you are talking about for the 16th.  It uses the same idea of  reverse dogleg, but with plenty of space to cope with the terrain.  This is an incredibly creative par 5 that uses the land very well.  The safe play is to stay left.  The dangerous play is up the right, but that way shortens the hole considerably.  The green is severe, but at the speeds they are kept, its more than reasonable - nothing wrong with a severe green for a par 5 which at times is comfortably reachable for the likes of me.  I think it is a superior hole to any long hole Machrihanish, and that is only one.  To me, Pennard's 17th is no more of a problem than Mach's 18th with its fake OOB.  This type of situation is for me, an absolute design failure.  I understand people are hitting the ball further these days, but there must always have been the urge to stay well right here.  

I can fully understand folks preferring Mach to Pennard, but I am still bewildered as to how Pennard could never get a mention for top 100 yet Mach is a shoe in.  To me, there is a serious disconnect with that way of thinking because I don't think Mach has better holes, nor is it prettier.    

Ciao

[Sean_A]

I can fully understand folks preferring Mach to Pennard, but I am still bewildered as to how Pennard could never get a mention for top 100 yet Mach is a shoe in.  

This view, I have sympathy with - not becaused I think Mach is necessarily overrated but because Pennard will likely never get a look in. Frustrating when the more prosaic Porthcawl seems a bit of a perennial...

I guess when I come across a situation where there seems to be a huge discrepancy, I figure both sides (or all sides) are likely pushing their agenda too far and that the common ground could easily be the more accurate position. 

Ciao

[Tony_Muldoon]

I can fully understand folks preferring Mach to Pennard, but I am still bewildered as to how Pennard could never get a mention for top 100 yet Mach is a shoe in.  

This view, I have sympathy with - not becaused I think Mach is necessarily overrated but because Pennard will likely never get a look in. Frustrating when the more prosaic Porthcawl seems a bit of a perennial...

I guess when I come across a situation where there seems to be a huge discrepancy, I figure both sides (or all sides) are likely pushing their agenda too far and that the common ground could easily be the more accurate position. 

Ciao

I think that's a reasonable position to take on somethings e.g. political, where pursuing one view over another will disadvantage almost as many persons as the other advances. To pick up on another current thread where subjective views on something's greatness are being debated a consensus scoring gives us conservative lists that rarely change.  Better to say various people are looking for different things in a Golf course.

After BUDA you and I wondered why the group just didn't seem to really get Pennard. Apart from agreeing they played n a really fierce wind, I'm still at a loss why more people don't get the same visceral reaction to the course that I get every time I go there.  It's only if you stick to your guns that you'll get more people to go there, repeatedly, and they'll either come round to your point of view or they'll try and get you to see why the believe you are wrong.  Apart from Ben Stephens, most seem to say they really liked it but never put it in their top 20, so i conclude they are just being polite.  Ben at least ahs a view - that there's a wasted oportunity - he's worng of course

[Matthew Mollica]

Royal Dornoch is one of a dozen courses in the world that I rated a perfect 10.

Tom,

please forgive my forgetfulness, but what were the other 11 courses that you rated a perfect 10?

Atb

As Tom said - there are 12 Tens -

Royal Dornoch
The Old Course
Muirfield
Pine Valley
Cypress Point
Pinehurst #2
Royal Melbourne
BallyBunion
Crystal Downs
Merion
Shinnecock Hills
NGLA

Interesting old threads here - http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,52604.msg1207485.html#msg1207485

and here - http://golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php?action=printpage;topic=36690.0

[Sean_A]

I can fully understand folks preferring Mach to Pennard, but I am still bewildered as to how Pennard could never get a mention for top 100 yet Mach is a shoe in.  

This view, I have sympathy with - not becaused I think Mach is necessarily overrated but because Pennard will likely never get a look in. Frustrating when the more prosaic Porthcawl seems a bit of a perennial...

I guess when I come across a situation where there seems to be a huge discrepancy, I figure both sides (or all sides) are likely pushing their agenda too far and that the common ground could easily be the more accurate position.  

Ciao

I think that's a reasonable position to take on somethings e.g. political, where pursuing one view over another will disadvantage almost as many persons as the other advances. To pick up on another current thread where subjective views on something's greatness are being debated a consensus scoring gives us conservative lists that rarely change.  Better to say various people are looking for different things in a Golf course.

After BUDA you and I wondered why the group just didn't seem to really get Pennard. Apart from agreeing they played n a really fierce wind, I'm still at a loss why more people don't get the same visceral reaction to the course that I get every time I go there.  It's only if you stick to your guns that you'll get more people to go there, repeatedly, and they'll either come round to your point of view or they'll try and get you to see why the believe you are wrong.  Apart from Ben Stephens, most seem to say they really liked it but never put it in their top 20, so i conclude they are just being polite.  Ben at least ahs a view - that there's a wasted oportunity - he's worng of course

Spangles

Someone on GCA must like the course because it was rated about 100 (30ish in GB&I) in the Unofficial GCA.com rankings.  Although I do recall there being a lukewarm reception from the Americans at the Pennard Buda.  I think most thought the conditions too difficult - it was about 20mph on the second day.  In general, the UK guys were much more impressed and Lorne was absolutely stunned by the course.  

It was that luewarm reception to Pennard which has made me leary of trying for a Kington Buda.  I don't think the Yanks would get it in a few days and its not that close to a lot of other so called must sees.  Just so you know, after many years of playing both Pennard and Kington, I think they are neck and neck in quality.  I go on about Pennard getting short shrift, but Kington is outrageously ignored by raters.  I guess it keeps green fees down  .  

Tom

We have heard about your mellowing on some courses (something which really surprises me), but what about courses you overshot the mark on?  Will any courses be demoted?  This is the real crux of any controversy the book may elicit.

Ciao      

[Mark Pearce]

Sean, Tony,

I thought Pennard was great.  I'd love to play it with just a bit less wind.  I think I'd need to know it better for it to make my top 20 but I can certainly see it getting in there.

I'd fully support a Kington BUDA as I've said before, though I share the concern that some might not get it, as it's so different to the norm.  Part of me thinks that's more of a reason to go there, not less, though.  I also think that Kington as a town would make a decent base for the event.

[Mark Bourgeois]

Sean

You keep arguing with these rankings as those they are the objective result of a sentient process. You really should stop giving it this level of respect and just move on.

Or, if you really do want to manipulate the rankings (without going the usual routes of bribing editors with advertising, paying raters to play your course, etc), then may I suggest running the Rye Playbook.

Say for example you want Pennard in. Start by digging up old quotes by Famous and Important People regarding the merits of the course. Or, even better, the club, its history, famous and important members, the town nearby -- anything on which we can hang our hats. I don't have time for all the details but basically what you need to do is find ways for tastemakers to tell raters it is great and no list without it carries legitimacy. Eventually, the groupthink fire will catch and you will have shaped raters' opinions as impressively as Uri Geller bent spoons.

It's a long process, made even longer if the course is remote. (FYI we are entering Year 6 of the Ganton campaign and although our band of admirers is small we are dedicated. Results are starting to show and it is only a matter of time before the groupthink catches.)

If the point of your exercise is to get Mach booted, then I think you're on the right track with a paired contrast. I am not sure Pennard is the right contrast though. You need to pair Mach with a more highly regarded course that people naturally associate. By singing the merits of the other course and using those merits to point where Mach is deficient, you will come to see the one balloon sink (Mach) while the other rises.

I am no expert on the dynamics of Pair-Driven Rankings Assassination, only being partway through the Ganton process (Woodhall Spa). But based on my limited experience it does seem easier to sink one than to elevate the other. (See: groundswell of opinions against WS.)

Bonne chance, and I remain, sir,

                                                                                            Helpfully yours,

[Dave Maberry]

Regarding Geoff Shackelford discussion on GD list (see David Tepper post #62 for link), is there a new Pine Valley book out or is he talking about new book on Merion?

[Mark Chaplin]

Tom - I've played 8 of your perfect 10s and other than the final 3 at Dornoch not suiting me haven't slated any of them.

[Anthony Butler]

Mark from a GB&I perspective Golf World uses raters from within the industry - pros, top amateurs, selectors, county union officials, architects, etc.
No one searching for a bit of access or a free lunch and sleeve of balls. Most importantly there is no romantic bias which is so apparent with overseas rankings of GB&I courses.

Dornoch isn't in my top ten and I've yet to play RCD, Portrush, Turnberry, Ganton or Carnoustie so I have a few gaps in my top end knowledge. For me the round fades out after 15.

Royal County Down fades out after 15, too, and it also belongs way way up there.

Perhaps what you are referring to as "romantic bias" is just that you are too close to the subject to appreciate what you've got ... you can't see the forest for the trees.  Although, the common thread with all of the courses you and Scott are knocking, is that they all feature great scenery.  Perhaps that's not as important to you as it is to some others, but suggesting that this makes their opinions unserious is a bit smarmy.

The last three holes at Kingston Heath are also quite pedestrian, yet it ranks at 20th in this latest survey... I can't understand why they haven't done something with 16-17 at least.

If you are going to place architectural quality and scenery as close in importance, it's hard to see how Cypress Point doesn't come out tops... the other Doak 10s that feature these two in abundance also have a far lower number of good weather days in which to enjoy the scenery.

Then again, considering the average amount of rounds played at CPC, that's a theoretical point..  

[Mark Chaplin]

Anthony when I played CPC we didn't see much for the first three holes, as it was a five hour round the mist cleared before we'd played too many holes.

[Mike_Clayton]

Anthony.

The last three holes at Kingston Heath are 'quite pedestrian'?
For me, the second shot into 16 is probably the best on the course and also - for me at least - the most befuddling.
And 17 is what it is - a blind second into a long 4 that Ben Crenshaw once said 'was one of the best blind holes I have ever played"
And, what would you do with it?
18 is a pretty decent hole too - not amazing but hardly 'pedestrian'

[Scott Warren]

I can accept someone may not like the last three at KH, but certainly they are anything but pedestrian.

[Matthew Mollica]

Anthony, out of curiosity, what adjective would you use for the last three holes at NSW GC?

[David_Tepper]

"other than the final 3 at Dornoch not suiting me haven't slated any of them"

Mark Chaplin -

#16 at Royal Dornoch does have its critics, but #17 & #18 are pretty strong holes, with some interesting features and a dash of quirk. I am wondering what is it about those 2 holes that does not suit you?

DT

[Frank Pont]

Frank

I don't know what organic means in relation to greens, but the greens and sites at Pennard are very much undervalued.  There are several very good greens, including 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 11, 16 & 17.  Another aspect which may or not be valued is seemless transitions between fairway and greens.  Generally, Pennard does very well in this regard.  In my experience, Machrihanish tends to be quite a bit more hairy than Pennard thus reducing paly options.  I would agree that Pennard's terrain is ott for the 17th.  The reverse dogleg concept with such a slope working against the shape of the hole is dodgy and can ony be properly by serious fairway shaping.  The width after the hole turns is too narrow.  I am not overly keen on the hole, but strangely, many people think it is wonderful  .  I don't have any idea what you are talking about for the 16th.  It uses the same idea of  reverse dogleg, but with plenty of space to cope with the terrain.  This is an incredibly creative par 5 that uses the land very well.  The safe play is to stay left.  The dangerous play is up the right, but that way shortens the hole considerably.  The green is severe, but at the speeds they are kept, its more than reasonable - nothing wrong with a severe green for a par 5 which at times is comfortably reachable for the likes of me.  I think it is a superior hole to any long hole Machrihanish, and that is only one.  To me, Pennard's 17th is no more of a problem than Mach's 18th with its fake OOB.  This type of situation is for me, an absolute design failure.  I understand people are hitting the ball further these days, but there must always have been the urge to stay well right here.  

I can fully understand folks preferring Mach to Pennard, but I am still bewildered as to how Pennard could never get a mention for top 100 yet Mach is a shoe in.  To me, there is a serious disconnect with that way of thinking because I don't think Mach has better holes, nor is it prettier.    

Ciao

Sean,

With organic I meant greens that were virtually unshaped, that follow the contours that were present in the landscape without any major adjustments.

On Pennard, I have only played it twice, but love the place so much I seriously considered becoming an overseas member. In the end
I did not because you can only be a member of so many remote golf courses (I already have Mach and Carne in my collection). If they ever need any support they can always call me.

I did go through my pictures of Pennard again to refresh my memories. First my wrong on hole 16, it was a hole earlier in the back nine. Second Pennard has a number of very natural looking greens, but I think Mach wins on that front. The course also has quite a lot of sidehill holes, esspecially on the back nine. What impressed me the most of Pennard is the routing of the topographical difficult site, and the incredible undulations in the fairways, especially on the font nine.

So I see two very different courses that I both dearly love, but are almost too different to compare.....

[Sean_A]

Frank

So you must be referring to the 10th as the par 5 you didn't care for.  Brad Klein said the same thing. All I can say is if one chooses the right club and follows the contours, the fairway is essentially a road.  I like the hole because big hitters need to take a big risk to make their length pay off.  I spose its not suprising that I consider Pennard's set of 5s as among the best I have experienced, especially for courses with more than two par 5s.  I usually don't like to see more than three tops on a course and had Pennard stuck to three...One thing I will say for the 5s, they are all completely different!  

Organic greens?  Well, the most interesting green on either course is Pennard's 7th.  I spose the site is quite organic, but I think the green is manufactured - could be wrong though.  I think the bowl is scooped deeper than what was found and I bet the front was lowered.  

I guess my bottom line is I am not itching to get back to Machrihanish.  Part of that could well be due to the club allowing Greg Norman to cut in front of us when we were stood on the tee.  This was one of the most rude things I have ever seen on a course - leave it to an Aussie  .  Some nob starts hovering a helicopter around practically blowing us over and lands near the proshop, all while we are trying to hit.  The nob turns out to be Norman.  He hops out with his kid and more or less puts his peg in the ground without an excuse me or hello.  Norman then proceeds to fire one miles left onto the beach then hits another.  No thanks yous as he strode off.  It was quite interesting to hear the reactions of the guys.  The non-golfers were shocked that Norman could be so rude and for the most part the golfers were in awe and didn't care.  Being cheeky, we did complain to the pro shop and I think she gave us each a hat as a way of saying sorry.  I still have that hat and I think of Norman whenever I put it on - which is rarely since its so faded I look like a match stick tip.

Ciao

[Thomas Dai]

I guess my bottom line is I am not itching to get back to Machrihanish.  Part of that could well be due to the club allowing Greg Norman to cut in front of us when we were stood on the tee.  This was one of the most rude things I have ever seen on a course - leave it to an Aussie  .  Some nob starts hovering a helicopter around practically blowing us over and lands near the proshop, all while we are trying to hit.  The nob turns out to be Norman.  He hops out with his kid and more or less puts his peg in the ground without an excuse me or hello.  Norman then proceeds to fire one miles left onto the beach then hits another.  No thanks yous as he strode off.  It was quite interesting to hear the reactions of the guys.  The non-golfers were shocked that Norman could be so rude and for the most part the golfers were in awe and didn't care.  Being cheeky, we did complain to the pro shop and I think she gave us each a hat as a way of saying sorry.  I still have that hat and I think of Norman whenever I put it on - which is rarely since its so faded I look like a match stick tip.

I've played with a few folk over the years who following such an incident might have been inclined to hit  a few mulligan's at the helicopter!
atb

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()