[Niall C]

Just back from BUDA where I played County Sligo, or Rosses Point as it’s sometimes known. I first played this course a number of years ago and of all the courses that I’ve played once, this was the course I most wanted to play again.


For those that haven’t played it, it’s a Colt course that is somewhat of an antidote to what I imagine a lot of the links courses on the west coast of Ireland are like (based on Carne and Enniscrone) which can involve an awful lot of trekking up and down and in between some huge sand dunes. That’s not to say that there aren’t any elevational changes at Rosses Point because there are, especially as you transition from the first few holes down to the 5^th and then back up again at the 17^th. By and large though the elevational changes are modest and in some parts you would even say the course is pretty flat.


What makes it a wonderful test (IMO) is the defence of the green complexes which are relatively simple in terms of shaping and reflect the general topography ie broad greens with gentle slopes rather than wild undulations.


It was with some trepidation then that I read of recent changes by Pat Ruddy. What I found was that one green had been replaced with a new green further back (3^rd) and several more had been extended or greatly enlarged. For instance the 5^th and the 10^th had almost been doubled in size with both greens extended straight back. On the other hand the 7^th had the merest addition to the back right that if memory serves required some banking back right to be removed.


I recall reading that the green changes were with a view to creating additional pin positions. Given the size and nature of the existing greens this seems strange. Indeed the new third green appears significantly smaller than most of the existing greens, while the greatly extended 5^th and 10^th had more than enough pin positions to begin with. What exactly then is the point of the changes ?
 
I should say I don’t intend this to be a knock on Pat Ruddy, just curious about the rationale for the changes. I’d also say the workmanship is first class. Probably the best conditioned links I’ve played for many years.
 
Niall

[Thomas Dai]

A couple of threads with some details as to what it was like -


http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,56266.msg1388548.html#msg1388548
&

http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,59233.msg1483412.html#msg1483412


atb

[Niall C]

Dai

I know what it was like, I played it before ! It's still one of my favourite courses but not sure the tinkering did much for it. On the other hand I don't think it necessarily detracted from the course apart from a couple of points and I'd even suggest the new 3rd green improves the hole even if the old one might have been a better green complex. I can't really recall the old one but the new one is nice enough but in a better location that makes it a true par 5 for most.

A lot of the big changes are to the back of the greens which for most of us rarely come into play. The existing internal contours remain intact so in theory I suppose the changes could be reversed relatively easily.

I'd be interested to hear the thoughts of those who played it last week.

Niall

[Mark Pearce]

Niall,


I think I mentioned this to you last week, but my biggest concern was that many of the extended greens had  bunkers on either side, roughly at the "join" between the old and new surfaces.  They looked very like fronting bunkers to me and I worry that the eventual plan is to take out of play as green the old surfaces and make the new work the entire green surface.  I hope I'm wrong.

[Niall C]

Mark

I sincerely hope you're wrong but it would make sense in terms of the way they have done the work. Can't help thinking if that is the case, it would have been easier to simply move the tees back and then you'd retain the existing greens. Maybe in another decade I'll get the chance to go back.

Niall

[Garland Bayley]

Why the changes? Because Strandhill has become the better course in the area and they need to catch up.

[Niall C]

Garland


Admittedly I didn't play Strandhill this trip but from what I recall, and the routing hasn't changed as I understand it, Strandhill is a long way behind Rosses Point. Strandhill has an unevenness that Rosses Point doesn't have.


Niall

[Mark Pearce]

NIall,


Interestingly, on one play, I remember more of Strandhill than I do of Rosses Point.  Rosses Point is a better walk (I must admit that, after Carne and Enniscrone, my heart leapt when Tony mentioned that Rosses Point was a Colt, so the walk wouldn't be stupid!) but STrandhill has a lot of good golf, despite the long walks and the poor 13th and 15th holes.

[Garland Bayley]

Well Niall, certainly Rosses Point is more even  (boring ) than Strandhill.

[Sean_A]

Haven't seen the changes at either course, but the excellent use of water (comfortably the best I have seen on a links) at Sligo shaves it for me in terms of preferring Sligo to Strandhill.  However, I think Sligo is quite plainly the better course with more sophisticated architecture.  I would be happy to play both again.


I hope the changes aren't too obtrusive. The one hole I thought was nowhere near as good as it might be is the 5th.  Were changes made there?



Ciao

[Niall C]

Sean


I'm rubbish with numbers but if you mean the par 5 hole with the elevated tee playing down to the bottom level then yes that is one of the holes that Ruddy has basically doubled the size of the green by adding the same again onto the back. Like the existing green, the new area of green is roughly rectangular in shape and offers a wee bit more by way of internal contours but adds absolutely nothing to strategy or interest. As Mark suggests, it's possible that this addition will become the green and existing green will become apron. To keep both as green would make it one of the biggest I've seen outwith St Andrews.


Niall

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()