What The Devil Is Going On With Modern Inland GB&I Courses?

[Sean_A]

I have been pondering my recent visit to Remedy Oak and how disappointed I was with the course....thinking it could be far better.  Thinking on it more I realize that there aren't many modern GB&I inland courses which have fared all that well...despite reputations and blustering.  Thinking on it a bit more, I realize that no-name Lonnie Poole in mid-market USA/can't make a top 10 modern public in North Carolina (though I see Golfweek actually lists Bald Head on its courses you can play..that is about a bad a call as is possible to make) is actually just as good as top 100 GB&I Remedy Oak.  There is obviously something very wrong with that scenario. 

Can somebody explain how a no name American course can even compete with a top 100 GB&I course in terms of rankings?  It baffles me as to what people see in Remdy Oak...kind of a dime a dozen course in the US.

Remedy Oak
www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,62026.msg1474131.html#msg1474131

Lonnie Poole
www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,61832.msg1470349.html#msg1470349

And just to confuse the matter more...how in the heck does a little known 9 holer even compete with Remedy Oak or Lonnie Poole? Its obvious that much more was spent on these properties even given for inflation...yet Leckford Old to me is obviously the best of the three. 

Is it me?  Do folks just see things I don't?  Are top 100 lists really that subjective? 

Ciao

[Kalen Braley]

Sean,

Lonnie Pool looks better than the UK course...maybe its cause I'm bunker slut and liked the bunkering there better.

You seem to make a great point here....only feasible explanation is, maybe there aren't many yank style courses over that way, so when they put one in, everyone goes ga-ga over it.  You know a variety is the spice-of-life thing or something??

[Tom_Doak]

Sean:


People like what they don't have.  They think it's cool because it's different.


When I lived in Scotland, nearly everyone said I ought to go and see Blairgowrie -- so I did.  It wouldn't rank very highly in North Carolina, either.

[Adam Lawrence]

Remedy, when it opened, was pretty exclusive and tough to get on. That always inflates a ranking. Plus the property is gorgeous and its tree lined nature enhances the feeling of privacy and isolation. Lots of people value these characteristics.

[Jon Wiggett]

Sean,

one reason could be that there are no GCAs doing the classic British style inland course these days. Take RO as an example. I seem to remember that it was going to be a heathland style course yet it seems to be part heathland part US style which is a blend that does not mix.

I would suggest G-West would be a modern inland course that is worth a look. It certainly looked the part when I had a look round.

Jon

[Michael Graham]

Is G-West ever going to open? This must be the longest course grow-in ever?

[Adrian_Stiff]

Sean - It is back to the same minor opinion again. What this forum generally likes is not what the majority like. This forum thinks 'the others' are heathens.


Primarily people like trees, love playing golf in trees, committees have spent the last 50 years filling every space.....take them out at GB courses....yep that is really barking up the wrong tree.


Good greens, good practice facilities, short game area, par 72, two returning nines, no winter tees, no winter greens, sand in the bunkers, barmaids with wide smiles and large chests are the best selling points.


Strategic golf worldwide is virtually zero, because hardly anywhere in the world has the right grass and climate to allow firm and fast and in the UK one of the few lucky places where it can work how many DAYS can we really have those conditions that strategic golf can be played on inland courses....Hence was born a new form of sculpture.

[Ed Tilley]

The classic style British inland course is, let's face it, an English heathland course. People know a lot more than me about the regulations but it is my understanding that there is no way you would be allowed to build a golf course on heathland anymore. This is ironic given that golf courses have played a major role in protecting heathland areas that would otherwise have been built on or turned into agricultural land.

Is there the money in the UK to build really high quality courses these days, given that the best land (links, heath) is very rarely available? It seems to me that the only really high end courses being built these days are built in Scotland for the tourist (US) market and not on the normal UK membership model - e.g. Trump International, Castle Stuart. Much as I think it is the best country for golf in the British Isles, when was the last great course built in England?

[Thomas Dai]

Any suggestions as to when the last great inland course was built in England, and which course it is?

atb

[Ed Tilley]

Any suggestions as to when the last great inland course was built in England, and which course it is?

atb

West Sussex - 1930!!

Unless anyone would describe Queenwood or Woburn Marquess as great. I haven't played either but I doubt there will be many on this site claiming this.

[Michael Graham]

The classic style British inland course is, let's face it, an English heathland course. People know a lot more than me about the regulations but it is my understanding that there is no way you would be allowed to build a golf course on heathland anymore. This is ironic given that golf courses have played a major role in protecting heathland areas that would otherwise have been built on or turned into agricultural land.

Is there the money in the UK to build really high quality courses these days, given that the best land (links, heath) is very rarely available? It seems to me that the only really high end courses being built these days are built in Scotland for the tourist (US) market and not on the normal UK membership model - e.g. Trump International, Castle Stuart. Much as I think it is the best country for golf in the British Isles, when was the last great course built in England?

Ed,

I'm not trying to be a smart ar*e and am genuinely interested but why to you is England the best country for golf in the British Isles?

[Sean_A]

I am not sure why it would necessarily take more money to build a different style of course.  When I think of the inland courses ranked in the top 100, none would strike me as cheap to build. 

Nearly every great inland English course is tree lined with at least a certain degree of isolation, but not many will feature water anywhere near to the degree Remedy does.  Some of the ones I see pix of in Scotland and Ireland look as though they may be much more wide open...taking advantage of exterior views.  Which is another bug bear of Remedy...there is some very cool countryside surrounding the course which is blocked out by trees.  The course is completely surounded by countryside, but one doesn't get much of a sense of this while playing. 

Yes, I can buy the we like what we don't have and exclusivity syndromes.  Though Remedy isn't exclusive these days (just expensive)...the owner figured out running a hobby at a loss isn't much fun after a few years.

Adrian - I suggest that a lot of people like strategic courses...hence the immense popularity Colt courses enjoy in the rankings.  Its just that golfers don't think in terms of strategy...as you say they focus on conditions etc. 

Its sad when a little heralded Lonnie Poole (good course though), when looked at objectively as is possible, can stand shoulder to shoulder with a top 100 GB&I course.  I dare say Lonnie Poole is just as good as some other courses as well and I am not convinced a greatmodern inland English course has ever been produced. Queenwood looks like it has a chance and I would like to see it one day. 

On the other hand, this despair over modern GB&I courses in a way demonstrates how deep the quality is for moderately priced golf in the US.  People rail on about how expensive golf is these days, but if one is willing to steer clear of big guns, there is plenty of very fine golf to be had at reasonable prices. 

Graham

A case could be made that if Kent, Sussex, Berkshire and Surrey were a separate country called Golf Heaven that it could be the best     I agree with Ed, England is far and away the best golf country in GB&I.  Which makes it more frustrating that there is a dearth of excellent newer inland courses. 

England has about 1900 of the 3000 courses in GB&I...stands to reason that it will be the best.

Ciao

[Ally Mcintosh]

I sit in the middle ground between Sean and Adrian on this.


Give a course some gently rolling but heavy farmland (basically all inland courses developed in GB&I since second world war) and you have a bad starting point... Then a lot of the differentiators just come down to a small 10% of what makes a course excellent or not... Artificial mounding done in a poor style is never going to fly on this website but it's often just aesthetic and has little relevance to playability. Grass choices that are driven from the type of soil also start to give a modern parkland feel rather than a classic feel. Bunker styles tend to be more for playability and low cost rather than aesthetic bling... Planted trees in uniform lines... I agree with Adrian that most of these things are an affront to those on GCA. But they mean nothing to 95% of golfers.


However, I do think there has been a singular lack of inventiveness and a tendency for British architects of the last 70 years to play it safe. Often with good reason (budget) but often just without a sense of playfulness.


I mentioned this elsewhere but having seen Robin Hiseman's bunker scheme on plan, I'm really looking forward to see the finished article he's building at JCB. There will be a ton of fun on that golf course. I know he's been forced to change his grass choice which has disappointed him. But I'm sure that the final product will be a real talking point.


What about Scott Macpherson's Close House? From photos, that seems to meet the aesthetic of choice (frilly bunkers, no planted trees)...

[Ed Tilley]

Ed,

I'm not trying to be a smart ar*e and am genuinely interested but why to you is England the best country for golf in the British Isles?

Michael,

Scotland and Ireland have the better "trophy" courses. Does England have a course as good as RCD, Ballybunion, Dornoch, TOC, Muirfield. England suffers slightly in comparison to Ireland and Scotland in the high quality links stakes - although any country that has RSG, Deal, St. Enodoc, Birkdale, Formby, Hoylake, Brancaster, Silloth, Lytham....... is hardly lacking in very good links.

However, does anyone want to try and keep a straight face and say that Ireland and Scotland are in the same league when it comes to inland courses as England. There is a gulf both in terms of quality and quantity. England is totally dominant over Scotland and Ireland when it comes to the good second tier inland courses that it has in abundance - the likes of the three Ws, Broadstone, Liphook.

For sheer variety and depth of quality of courses, England is superior to Scotland which is superior to Ireland. Stands to reason really as England has more courses than the rest of the British Isles put together. Top100golfcourses.co.uk has 48 of the top 100 GB&I courses in England - but only 5 of the top 20. I would venture that it would have much more than 50% of the 100-200 courses.

[Sean_A]

A place like Cumberwell Park might be an excellent study in modern design.  On site there is a 9 holer which essentially espouses the GCA principles of design.  Sure, the soil is not going to support the fine fescues we like to see, but to offset this the site is hilly so the ball will run and maybe more importantly, the fairway lines are wide to encourage run.  Finally, the site is basically treeless.  The course stands in complete contrast to holes built much earlier at the bottom of the site.  I am not saying its a world beater, but Cumberwell Park Orange is just as good as Leckford Old...indeed, the two courses are quite similar.  Adrian tells me that many members pick and choose when to play the Orange because it gets windy.  This is quite odd to me given the love links enjoy in GB&I.  It seems strange to differentiate between the two styles where wind is concerned. 


Ciao

[Michael Graham]

Ed,

I'm not trying to be a smart ar*e and am genuinely interested but why to you is England the best country for golf in the British Isles?

Michael,

Scotland and Ireland have the better "trophy" courses. Does England have a course as good as RCD, Ballybunion, Dornoch, TOC, Muirfield. England suffers slightly in comparison to Ireland and Scotland in the high quality links stakes - although any country that has RSG, Deal, St. Enodoc, Birkdale, Formby, Hoylake, Brancaster, Silloth, Lytham....... is hardly lacking in very good links.

However, does anyone want to try and keep a straight face and say that Ireland and Scotland are in the same league when it comes to inland courses as England. There is a gulf both in terms of quality and quantity. England is totally dominant over Scotland and Ireland when it comes to the good second tier inland courses that it has in abundance - the likes of the three Ws, Broadstone, Liphook.

For sheer variety and depth of quality of courses, England is superior to Scotland which is superior to Ireland. Stands to reason really as England has more courses than the rest of the British Isles put together. Top100golfcourses.co.uk has 48 of the top 100 GB&I courses in England - but only 5 of the top 20. I would venture that it would have much more than 50% of the 100-200 courses.

Ed,

Thank you for the thoughtful reply. My experience of golf south of the border is far too limited. I definitely agree with you on the calibre of inland courses in England vs Scotland. During this year's Buda I played Cavendish as a warm up and then Sherwood Forest and Notts. Scotland just doesn't have anything to compare to those three, least of all the big, brawny Notts. There are lovely inland courses such as Ladybank, Rosemount and Boat of Garten but nothing on the grand scale of Hollinwell. Let's not bring up Spey Valley. Scotland is much more 'top heavy' in quality as the numbers from top100golfcourses illustrates.

[Thomas Dai]

Large areas of land, and heaths and links were particularly popular, were taken over by the MoD during WWII and never given back. Maybe a factor why since that time there has been less suitable land available to build the kind of courses we posting herein seem to prefer.



atb

[Sean_A]

I question the need for heathland to build great inland courses.  While the soil and turf make life easier, it isn't the entire story by a long way.


Ciao

[Niall C]

Sean


I think that statement is very true. From the little I've seen there's a stark difference between modern US and UK inland designs and its more than just the soil. There just seems to be more confidence and artistic endeavour in some US designs (I'm thinking of some of the courses I've seen down in Myrtle like Caledonia, True Blue, Heritage) and possibly even to a different scale. How much of this is a factor of budget and what respective gca's are used, I don't know.


Niall

[Mark Pearce]

In May I played 3 courses in Ohio, Moraine Country Club, Springfield CC and The Golf Club.  I haven't seen anything like any of them in the UK.  I just think that, for whatever reason, the US does parkland much better.  Perhaps its the boldness of some of these designs.  I guess the same can be said of other inland US courses I have played (Yale, Lawsonia Links, Charles River, Olympia Fields North, George Wright).  All have a boldness and scale that doesn't get seen in UK parkland courses.

[Mark Chaplin]

I think part of the reason for generally poor courses is new courses are either proprietary or pay and pay. We have an extremely limited high end pay and play market. Golfers prefer clubs with history and reputation. High end proprietary usually ends in tears so people won't take the risk.

The England question is funny. Most golfers I meet at Deal are doing their first English trip having done 5-10 previous trips to Ireland and Scotland. They usually come back as they realise Ireland and Scotland are over hyped in the USA and you aren't following a Perry Bus full of red necks each day. 

[Michael Graham]

With apologies to any U.K based architects on GCA but did we on this side of the Atlantic miss out one someone like Mike Strantz who was afraid to take risks even if they didn't always come off.

[Ed Tilley]

The England question is funny. Most golfers I meet at Deal are doing their first English trip having done 5-10 previous trips to Ireland and Scotland. They usually come back as they realise Ireland and Scotland are over hyped in the USA and you aren't following a Perry Bus full of red necks each day.

RSG, Deal, Rye, West Sussex, Sunningdale (x2), Walton Heath (x2). Not a bad Kent / Sussex / Surrey jaunt - with an optional night or two in London as part of the package. Less than 2 hours driving between any of these courses - subject to M25 traffic of course!

[Adam Lawrence]

I think part of the reason for generally poor courses is new courses are either proprietary or pay and pay. We have an extremely limited high end pay and play market. Golfers prefer clubs with history and reputation. High end proprietary usually ends in tears so people won't take the risk.

The reason for that is that you can play all the privates as a visitor so what's the reason for the high end pay and play?

[Thomas Dai]

.......What this forum generally likes is not what the majority like.......

Thankfully so I imagine, otherwise the kind of courses we posting herein generally like would probably have less tee-times available................for us! Phew!


Atb