Scotland Trip Rankings

[Mark Bourgeois]

Daylight runs from 0400-2230 !


No need to leave anything out if you have the energy and a driver.

[Charles Lund]

Agree about the clustering of the great courses in Ireland versus Scotland.  I took five weeks for 27 rounds my first trip to Ireland and four for 22 rounds on my first trip to Scotland.  i did solo self drive trips. But I am in a different life phase and energy cycle.  I am currently on my 33rd overseas trip, mostly for golf, since the end of 2007.

I think ypu would like Cruden Bay and Royal Aberdeen.  The Trump course was 6nder construction when I was there.

I'll watch for the report of your England trip next year.

I am thinking about a couple of weeks in Wales.  Later this summer I am headed to the Devon Cornwall Coast,

Charles Lund

[jeffwarne]

But I am in a different life phase and energy cycle.  I am currently on my 33rd overseas trip, mostly for golf, since the end of 2007.

I am thinking about a couple of weeks in Wales.  Later this summer I am headed to the Devon Cornwall Coast,

Charles Lund

You.... are...my.... hero

[cary lichtenstein]

my wife and I did an 11 day trip, played 16 rounds. The difference is we played every course between 5 and 2 times, Dornoch 5 times, the Old Course 2 times, alisa 5 times, etc.


I think if you did that, your rankings might change a bit. Dornock was great. Tough to separate history from the Old Course, playing conditions vary so much.

[Tom_Doak]

   It's frankly nearly a joke for the Tour pros with multiple drivable par 4s, etc.   I guess the R & A is just too lazy to go out and use other courses for an Open Championship.   Two years ago was a prime example - the weather was absolutely horrid (balls were blowing off the green) and the winner was still 15 under! 

Bringing up this line of argument weakens your take.  The winning score at Prestick or North Berwick would be even lower than at St. Andrews, and that didn't seem to bother you, correctly.  So why bring it up for St. Andrews?  You're just grasping at straws.


Also, how many par-4's did you drive?

[MClutterbuck]

Jon,


Thank you for the write up. I enjoyed it a lot. We must have played on similar dates, although we did get quite a lot of wind and rain at Brora and Castle Stuart on the first couple of days.


Even after a week on non golf vacation and thinking about the courses, I struggle to rank, critique or write about any of the 9 courses. In some ways I feel it betrays our fantastic trip. The one thing I can say is all four of us enjoyed each and every one of the courses immensely, and we give each of them its dues for what they are.



In order of play we enjoyed:
Royal Dornoch
Brora
Castle Stuart
North Berwick
Gullane #1
Muirfield (2 rounds)
Castle Course
Old Course
Kingsbarns


I dont think I can single out the best course of the list, nor can I easily single out the worst (sorry Tom Doak, maybe it was my net 68, or maybe the course is much changed since you last saw it. By the way, I think #17 is one of the best holes I have played).


Certainly everything I read on this site prior to traveling made them more enjoyable. Thank you to all that contributed. And special thanks to David, Tim and David who allowed us to get to know not only the courses, but also enjoy the clubs and its members.

[Jerry Kluger]

We just came back from more than 2 weeks in Scotland and I would say that I liked them all. Played many of the rounds with members which made them even better. Played North Berwick twice, first time with the front nine into the wind and the second time with the wind in the opposite direction which meant the back would be into the wind and I was thinking about that during the entire front nine. Dunbar was a real gem with 14 links holes along the water,  and we learned that they had bought the land above the second hole and were going to build a new clubhouse, nine hole course and practice facility and pay for it by selling the land where the current clubhouse is located. It seems that Dunbar is growing as Edinburgh has gotten very expensivexcited so people are commuting by train from Dunbar.

[JWinick]

Tom,


Totally different topic - the quality of a golf course versus the suitability for a championship.    I am talking about the Old Course as an Open site every five years.   Don't you think it makes is less special when they go there that frequently?   

   It's frankly nearly a joke for the Tour pros with multiple drivable par 4s, etc.   I guess the R & A is just too lazy to go out and use other courses for an Open Championship.   Two years ago was a prime example - the weather was absolutely horrid (balls were blowing off the green) and the winner was still 15 under! 

Bringing up this line of argument weakens your take.  The winning score at Prestick or North Berwick would be even lower than at St. Andrews, and that didn't seem to bother you, correctly.  So why bring it up for St. Andrews?  You're just grasping at straws.


Also, how many par-4's did you drive?

[Mark Pearce]

JWinick,  do you think the Old Course is doing a bad job of identifying te Champion Golfer of the Year?

[Charles Lund]

Winners of Open Championships on The Old Course since 1970 other than Louie Ousthuizen have won multiple majors.  Four winners won The Open three times.  They include Jack Nicklaus, Tiger Woods, Nick Faldo, and Seve Ballesteros.

Hard to think of Open winners on The Old Course as being an anomalous group of major winners.  Go back a few more Opens there and you have Peter Thomson, Tony Lema, and Kel Nagle.

Charles Lund

[jeffwarne]

Tom,


I think the biggest problem with the Old Course is it is just too over-exposed.    Do we really need to see an Open Championship there every five years?   It's frankly nearly a joke for the Tour pros with multiple drivable par 4s, etc.   I guess the R & A is just too lazy to go out and use other courses for an Open Championship.   Two years ago was a prime example - the weather was absolutely horrid (balls were blowing off the green) and the winner was still 15 under!   

-1
St Andrews is awesome and has the greatest list of winners of any site for any major-save Augusta
kudos to the R&A  for returning so often
They can just chop 8 shots off par like the USGA and all would be well and they'd be showcasing 9 and 10 as the two toughest back to back par 3's in the world.

[JWinick]

Mark,


I think they go back to TOC way too often.    I think the last of champions has been impressive, but that not remarkable because they go so often.   

JWinick,  do you think the Old Course is doing a bad job of identifying te Champion Golfer of the Year?

[JWinick]

Here is all of the Open sites since 1990....   I just think that the R & A should be spreading it around a bit more, as the Old Course no longer offers as stern a test as the others in the rota.   

Row Labels	Sum of Score to Par	Average of Score to Par
St Andrews	-88	-14.67
Royal Troon	-42	-14.00
Royal Liverpool	-35	-17.50
Royal Lytham & St Annes	-30	-10.00
Muirfield	-21	-7.00
Turnberry	-20	-10.00
Royal St George's	-19	-6.33
Royal Birkdale	-5	-1.67
Carnoustie	-1	-0.50
Grand Total

-261[/t][/t] -9.67

[Mark Pearce]

I think that table sums up the difference in our views.  I couldn't give a stuff about the average winning score to par.  What I care about is which course requires the best shotmaking, most imagination and tests all aspects of the game.  Nowhere is as good a test of the game from 100 yards in as St Andrews. 


If the reason that there are so many great players on the board at TOC was down to how often the OPen is there, then there'd be a whole bunch of Todd Hamiltons and Ben Curtises as well.  But there aren't.  St Andrews barely sees a winner who isn't a great ball striker and who possesses a great short game.  It separates the wheat from the chaff better than almost anywhere.  Who cares if anyone can go low, if only the best can go lower?

[jeffwarne]

Who cares if anyone can go low, if only the best can go lower?

+1
Nicklaus, Seve, Faldo, Tiger(twice) Braid (twice)Jones, Snead, Locke


The fact that anyone could suggest it's not a test is the purest testimony that equipment needs to be reigned in before we are doomed to a series of 5 hour plus modern monstrocities ick...

[Sean_A]

While I disagree with J's conclusion that the Open should be played less at TOC, I do take his point that TOC is comfortably the easiest of the Open venues and absolutely requires wind to challenge the players.  No wind at TOC means 69 is a very mediocre score.  Thats said, I am not overly fussed about this simply because when the course is firm TOC is comfortably the most entertaining Open venue.  If guys shoot 64 and win that doesn't worry me if I am entertained.  If there is any golf event I am going to want to see it is the Open at TOC...everything else is second place.

Ciao

[jeffwarne]

While I disagree with J's conclusion that the Open should be played less at TOC, I do take his point that TOC is comfortably the easiest of the Open venues and absolutely requires wind to challenge the players.  No wind at TOC means 69 is a very mediocre score.  Thats said, I am not overly fussed about this simply because when the course is firm TOC is comfortably the most entertaining Open venue.  If guys shoot 64 and win that doesn't worry me if I am entertained.  If there is any golf event I am going to want to see it is the Open at TOC...everything else is second place.

Ciao

+1

[Jon Wiggett]

While I disagree with J's conclusion that the Open should be played less at TOC, I do take his point that TOC is comfortably the easiest of the Open venues and absolutely requires wind to challenge the players.  No wind at TOC means 69 is a very mediocre score.  Thats said, I am not overly fussed about this simply because when the course is firm TOC is comfortably the most entertaining Open venue.  If guys shoot 64 and win that doesn't worry me if I am entertained.  If there is any golf event I am going to want to see it is the Open at TOC...everything else is second place.

Ciao

+2


At TOC so much depends on the weather but having said that they could make the course very difficult even on a wind still day just through pin position but were the wind to pick up it would become a moaning festival of how unfair the set up was. A great course produces great champions and has nothing to do with difficulty to par.


Jon

[Thomas Dai]

The Open at TOC -


1) The Open returns to TOC to often.
[/size]2) Pace of play at TOC Opens is awful.


3) Given modern equipment and player conditioning I would like to see Open's at St Andrews played over a composite course starting on TOC 1st and finishing on 16th, 17th and 18th with the rest of the holes made up from the most appropriate/challenging holes on the 3 other courses.


atb

[Jon Wiggett]

The Open at TOC -


1) The Open returns to TOC to often.

2) Pace of play at TOC Opens is awful.


3) Given modern equipment and player conditioning I would like to see Open's at St Andrews played over a composite course starting on TOC 1st and finishing on 16th, 17th and 18th with the rest of the holes made up from the most appropriate/challenging holes on the 3 other courses.


atb

[Sean_A]

I never understod the pace of play issue when watching golf.  Isn't that more a problem for the network?  I mean they need to show more shots and players when play is slow....and golf is inherently too slow for tv...play must be shown cut and chopped.  If done well, the viewer shouldn't have any sense of slow play. Instead, tv hangs on players doing nothing rather than focusing on action elsewhere. What is it you expect....for the viewer to simply follow players hitting and walking up fairways?

Ciao

[JWinick]

I think the pace of play at TOC opens is slower because of the doubled putting surfaces and how close you are from tee to green.   I'm not sure use a composite course would be a solution as it would be strange.    I'm merely suggesting that you make the Old Course more special by having the Open every 10-12 years, instead of every 5-6 years.    I also think that other courses show better on TV.

The Open at TOC -


1) The Open returns to TOC to often.

2) Pace of play at TOC Opens is awful.


3) Given modern equipment and player conditioning I would like to see Open's at St Andrews played over a composite course starting on TOC 1st and finishing on 16th, 17th and 18th with the rest of the holes made up from the most appropriate/challenging holes on the 3 other courses.


atb

[Niall C]

Who cares if anyone can go low, if only the best can go lower?

+1
Nicklaus, Seve, Faldo, Tiger(twice) Braid (twice)Jones, Snead, Locke

Jeff (and Mark)


You missed out JH Taylor and Peter Thomson. Equally you missed out such “greats” as Denny Shute, Dick Burton and Jock Hutchison. The Open has been played 29 times at St Andrews and not every champion was a superstar, but what you probably can say is that on the day they deserved to win.


The basic point Jon was making however is that TOC is over-exposed which I think is right, even though his supporting arguments about par don’t really support this too much. I have a nagging suspicion that the 5 year rule for TOC was probably an attempt to stop it going the same way as Prestwick ie. the longer the absence the easier it is to say that the course isn’t fit for purpose. Better to automatically fill in the diary for another TOC Open in 5 years time.


Niall

[JWinick]

Niall,


I think with good conditions, the winner at St Andrews today would be about 25 Under.    2015 had horrid conditions (remember when they sent the players out for 30 minutes and the balls were blowing off the green) and the winner was still -15.   


I don't think the R&A has much to worry about if they pushed it to every 8th - 12th year.     Everyone would appreciate it more as it would be more special.


Jon

[Peter Pallotta]

Without arguing about/against any of the points so far, it's striking to me how subtly and yet how firmly the world's value system infiltrates and influences our own. Here we are: a site dedicated to great architecture and classic courses and to the essential spirit of the game. And there they are: the USGA and the R&A and private club members and golf announcers and would-be scratch golfers -- all of whom want a 'fair but challenging test' for the best golfers in the world.  And what happens? Their value system starts shaping/becoming our own. We find ourselves needing to defend/justify the Home of Golf as a venue for The Open Championship -- and to defend it not in terms of our own standards but in terms of theirs. We get into the details of how much wind and what pin positions and how much added length is necessary to ensure its continued viability. Necessary for what? To ensure a 'fair but challenging test'. If we were justifying it, instead, by our own standards, might we not just as easily say:  The game of golf began there, indeed, was born there. There is no more appropriate venue in the world for the oldest and most truly open championship in all of golf. The Old Course is neither fair nor challenging; it simply is. It is what the site allowed it to be, and what it should always remain: a common field of play, one that each individual competitor engages with as he/she deems best.
But that point of view would honour the golf course and history and charm and frugal/sustainable common sense more than egos and money and corporate agendas and the heroes of a pampered star-system and so-called 'manly' virtues like toughness and fairness and the fickle wants/wishes of the puffed up mandarins and blue bloods of the golfing industry.
And unless we're careful, it becomes harder and harder every day to remember that: to remember own our legitimate and I think useful/meaningful point of view.         
Peter