Chamber's Bay, quick recap and (hypothetical) placement among UK and IRL links

[David Davis]

Chamber's Bay really did have it all this year.


At GCA we were very fortunate to have weeks of building anticipation and discussions about every hole on the course thanks to the brilliant efforts of Rich. Much appreciated there.


The course provided us with loads of controversy, too long, poor putting surfaces, to hard a walk, too many undulations, not enough viewing for fans.


(on the down side, worst TV coverage and worst commentating I've ever seen/heard at a major)


Perhaps one of the most exciting final days in the history of the US Open which can only attest to the championship caliber and test of the course and the set up.


I do expect that it will come out that the greens even though they were the same for all involved left quite a bit to be desired by the pros and fans alike. Some of the pros simply embraced the challenge while others in search of excuses look elsewhere to blame their poor efforts and lack of focus for the week. Nice to have a scapegoat after all. I believe Chamber's has had green turf struggles every since they opened and they know it. It's not a new discussion and I'd be really surprised to not see them give in and change to poa or bent in order to get another US Open in the future.


I'm curious to know everyones thoughts on the following hypothetical situation. I know that Chamber's raced into the Top 100 Courses in the World recently. Let's say it wasn't in the US but had been created in the UK or Ireland. Having seen, knowing the course now and perhaps even having played it, if you assume it a links course, do you think it would make the Top 50, Top100 links courses in the UK and Ireland and if so where would you put it?

[Adam Lawrence]

I think CB has to be considered sui generis. It doesn't resemble a British links in any useful way and I can't see how they can effectively be compared.

[Greg Gilson]

I am not bothered about comparing it to other links or links-like () courses.

I thought it was a great venue. Furthermore, its a wonderful, fun, challenging, interesting, scenic track for the average punter. It's #16 in my list of "Personal Favourite Courses" Worldwide.

[Ben Attwood]

Having not played it my opinion is pretty meaningless but I think it would rank very well in a list of UK links courses. One thing it appears to have going for it is the playability by all levels. At a number of the top UK links most handicappers wouldn't survive the round with one ball. They way CB managed to challenge all levels has to be applauded.

[Niall C]

Adam


How does it compare to Castle Stuart or Kingsbarns ?


Niall

[Dieter Jones]

Not according to Mr Player, Ben.

[David Davis]

Adam


How does it compare to Castle Stuart or Kingsbarns ?


Niall

Niall, the last time I checked my name wasn't Adam. However, I have played the 3 courses in questions more than once. They are similar in that they are modern manufactured links experiences no doubt. I personally find Castle Stuart and Kingsbarns far more subtle with far less undulations.


Chamber's is bold in the sense of elevation changes and dramatic undulations especially on greens. I think they play similar but would also say the greens at the Scottish courses are far smoother in terms of true role and quality of turf. They are also routed in a way that allows a very gentle walk in my opinion with few sizable walks between tees and greens. On the other hand, I wouldn't say either of the Scottish courses were built with major championships in mind from a total length of course viewpoint while Chamber's is as we have all witnessed a beast in terms of length and options.

[Adam Lawrence]

I just don't think there is anything in the UK that is anything like CB. Nowhere that has that degree of elevation change. Nowhere where there is such a huge amount of exposed sand. It's a fruitless comparison.

[David Davis]

I just don't think there is anything in the UK that is anything like CB. Nowhere that has that degree of elevation change. Nowhere where there is such a huge amount of exposed sand. It's a fruitless comparison.

Adam, we compare all types of golf courses that are not necessarily similar. You might argue that all comparisons are fruitless no doubt. Killjoy! We are talking links and links like - though some argue links as well courses. It's another thing to need to be careful when stating your opinions which I understand.


The "hypothetical" question is not that tough. I'm asking how would it be seen if you took the experience out of a place where it is so unique and dropped it into links paradise. The same could be down for Sand Hills. Would it be #3 - 4 in UK and Ireland if it were situated there rather than in the US where green parkland golf is the norm?

[Matt MacIver]

It played like a links and that's all the definitional noise I care about.


I would love to play CB like it was last weekend and would pay full freight - that's a high endorsement in my book.


The individual holes look a blast to play - strong driving angles and fun green complexes. The elevation change is a bonus in my book and make up for the lack of consistently strong winds. The walk looks tough but perhaps not as bad from the forward tees where I'd play from? 


Having played ~15-20 links / links-like courses (i.e. not a lot) I put it in the middle - so that means I liked it. I'd like to think it's in the top 100...certainly top 200. Sadly it's a long way from home and with only one course and so many other linksy options both old and new, it will be stroke of luck if I ever get to play it.

[Ben Attwood]

Not according to Mr Player, Ben.

Mr Player's rant was interesting. Quite a few of his points chimed with what the USGA were trying to do! Less water, wide fairways, combat the distance of the ball, making the game fun, so it's a little sad that he didn't think things through a little more and was so violent in his manner (perhaps this can explained by the fact he is a competitor in the GCA business: http://www.golf.com/tour-and-news/robert-trent-jones-jr-responds-gary-players-criticism-chambers-bay).

As to playability, I can't find it now but there is a youtube video made by a proud dad showing his son through ages 4-8 (i would guess) learning golf and making birdies at CB. Obviously Mr Player hasn't seen that.

I think the comparison is good as one could argue that many UK links courses have gone away from some of their character by making the fairways narrow and the rough very penal (US open style). With the USGA going away from that perhaps some UK courses can move back to wider fairways and more fun...?

So I would place it well in the top 100 and think it should rank alongside Castle Stuart.

[David Davis]

Ok so I just called it a 7 on another thread but still I don't believe when compared to some of my favorite links courses is belongs in the same thread.


RCD
Portrush
Lahinch
Portmarnock
etc etc.


Given their relative placement in the rankings I struggle with it being considered a top 100 world course.

[Garland Bayley]

Hard to compare to links courses in the UK, because links courses don't get to choose where to put their dunes. The ability to place dunes allowed them to create wide playing corridors that most people can play relatively easily on.


With the caveat that I have only played 16 links courses in the UK, I would put Chambers Bay in the top 20% of courses where your goal is to go out and have fun as a high handicapper.


There are links courses in the UK that would benefit greatly by turning sheep out on them, thereby increasing the fun factor significantly.