Royal Dornoch - New 7th hole in progress

[William_G]

Below are Rich’s thoughts on the 7th hole as stated in one of his ‘In My Opinion’ pieces about RDGC - https://golfclubatlas.com/in-my-opinion/the-architectural-evolution-of-royal-dornoch-golf-club/
Atb


“After the climb up to the 7th tee Duncan built one ordinary but very difficult hole. It used to play as a long and seemingly impossibly narrow pathway through gorse, a la the 11th at Troon. With the gorse cut back to speed up play these days, it is just a long hard slog. Not a bad hole, but one of the least appealing at RDGC. Some cognoscenti have thought about building a new green long and to the right of the current one, at the edge of the hill down to the lower linksland, making it a par 5 and giving us a spectacular seascape green to aim at. This may happen one day.”

funny thing is, I own and have read that book, but did not connect the dots


thank you


cheers

[Niall C]

Any time I played the 7th I didn't find it scary. I found it an OK hole with a good, even a very good green, but also a bit of a slog to get to the green. Moving the hole sideways as what M&E are doing also at Cruden Bay (and IIRC also what Frank Pont proposed) produces, or at least could do, a classic bit of architecture as I mentioned in a previous post.

The Cruden Bay hole is interesting in that usually the trouble is on the right where at CB it is on the left. For most golfers trouble on the right is more daunting, as for one thing, most golfers are right handers who tend to hit a fade/slice ie. towards the trouble, and for another, they have to face the trouble as they play the shot. I'm usually scathing about great efforts simply to create a view but it seems to me in this instance, and at CB, the work has been done not just to provide a pretty view but to use it to intimidate. That's good design in my book. Or at least the intent is assuming that is what is actually intended.

As an aside, DT mentions Mark Parsinen and Castle Stuart. I'm on record as saying CS isn't all that but the 3rd hole is an excellent hole and it has similar design characteristics.

Niall 

[Ben Stephens]

I for one have not played Dornoch - I know I need to one day after finding the vaccine!


One wonders whether the ODG Duncan, Braid, Colt or even Ross would have replicated the hole like the club has done recently? or would they have done something different?


On the other side was it partially the sake of conservation of replicating the old hole with a better end view?


There have been some good and bad improvements to major/well known courses maybe the bad ones at other courses put the highly regarded golf clubs off and less risk averse. This is the approach/tendency with lots of high profile clubs in the UK.


When designing golf courses I tend to create more interesting shorter holes on undulating ground and longer par 4 holes on flattish ground which seems to be the case from holes 3 to 7 at Dornoch.


I christen this hole the "Alba Marmite" 

[MClutterbuck]

Why replicate something when you could have something potentially better.

This hole was presented by Tom Mackenzie and the Course Manager of RDGC at the Golf Course Architecture Symposium. It was ok but from a design point of view I was not impressed and a bit frustrated with that view the hole could have been a lot better possibly a more strategic hole with the new width they have.

Taking to another GCA-er and his club had something similar and he said it was more down to the brief set out by the club and I have been in a similar position with one of the projects I had worked on. The client or club has the main say in approach and choice of designer.

I would say most clubs are resistant to major changes or think out of the box and take a safety first approach on designer(s) which has been the case at RDGC and many other clubs. 

On the other hand the new RDGC clubhouse is interesting its a case of marmite some like it and others don't the same goes for golf holes

I did wonder why a dogleg left wasn't created.

Ciao

Not wanting to be an armchair architect, but I would have assumed that if you were going to redesign the hole entirely, a dogleg right to be a better option? you could have kept much of the initial fairway (with some added width) and then dogleg right to the new green location. This would leave enough space for the new 8th tee.

I dont however understand the calls for more interesting shaping on a forum that predominantly applauds the leave things natural approach.

Finally, it seems like folks are divided between those who say the new hole is the same and are just worried about the money spent for no real improvement (and not being members it is none of their business) and those that say the hole will be much better with the views and infinity green. So it seems like a successful change, right?

[Sean_A]

Why replicate something when you could have something potentially better.

This hole was presented by Tom Mackenzie and the Course Manager of RDGC at the Golf Course Architecture Symposium. It was ok but from a design point of view I was not impressed and a bit frustrated with that view the hole could have been a lot better possibly a more strategic hole with the new width they have.

Taking to another GCA-er and his club had something similar and he said it was more down to the brief set out by the club and I have been in a similar position with one of the projects I had worked on. The client or club has the main say in approach and choice of designer.

I would say most clubs are resistant to major changes or think out of the box and take a safety first approach on designer(s) which has been the case at RDGC and many other clubs. 

On the other hand the new RDGC clubhouse is interesting its a case of marmite some like it and others don't the same goes for golf holes

I did wonder why a dogleg left wasn't created.

Ciao

Not wanting to be an armchair architect, but I would have assumed that if you were going to redesign the hole entirely, a dogleg right to be a better option? you could have kept much of the initial fairway (with some added width) and then dogleg right to the new green location. This would leave enough space for the new 8th tee.

I dont however understand the calls for more interesting shaping on a forum that predominantly applauds the leave things natural approach.

Finally, it seems like folks are divided between those who say the new hole is the same and are just worried about the money spent for no real improvement (and not being members it is none of their business) and those that say the hole will be much better with the views and infinity green. So it seems like a successful change, right?

I was thinking more of a tee shot toward the drop-off then play the approach along the drop-off. The green is open on the right and more defended on the left-centre for those who bailed on the aggressive tee shot.  Its sort of a pick your poison. 


Ciao

[MClutterbuck]

Why replicate something when you could have something potentially better.

This hole was presented by Tom Mackenzie and the Course Manager of RDGC at the Golf Course Architecture Symposium. It was ok but from a design point of view I was not impressed and a bit frustrated with that view the hole could have been a lot better possibly a more strategic hole with the new width they have.

Taking to another GCA-er and his club had something similar and he said it was more down to the brief set out by the club and I have been in a similar position with one of the projects I had worked on. The client or club has the main say in approach and choice of designer.

I would say most clubs are resistant to major changes or think out of the box and take a safety first approach on designer(s) which has been the case at RDGC and many other clubs. 

On the other hand the new RDGC clubhouse is interesting its a case of marmite some like it and others don't the same goes for golf holes

I did wonder why a dogleg left wasn't created.

Ciao

Not wanting to be an armchair architect, but I would have assumed that if you were going to redesign the hole entirely, a dogleg right to be a better option? you could have kept much of the initial fairway (with some added width) and then dogleg right to the new green location. This would leave enough space for the new 8th tee.

I dont however understand the calls for more interesting shaping on a forum that predominantly applauds the leave things natural approach.

Finally, it seems like folks are divided between those who say the new hole is the same and are just worried about the money spent for no real improvement (and not being members it is none of their business) and those that say the hole will be much better with the views and infinity green. So it seems like a successful change, right?

I was thinking more of a tee shot toward the drop-off then play the approach along the drop-off. The green is open on the right and more defended on the left-centre for those who bailed on the aggressive tee shot.  Its sort of a pick your poison. 


Ciao

Ok, so still to the same new green position. Both work I guess. Want to get back soon!

[David Davis]

I thought I'd share Tom Mackenzie's comments to me about this hole (with his permission of course). Maybe some of you already know this but I'd find it hard to believe that anyone arguing against the change would still feel that way after reading it.


The 7^th at Dornoch.
[/size]I can only think that any comments about disturbing the flow of the course is because the writer does not realise that the 8^th tees are being moved right but that that work is being done next winter. If they do know this then I am baffled how it can be seen to disturb the flow as the walk to the next tee will be almost exactly the same.[/color]
[/size] [/color]
[/size]In many ways, the improvement to the 8^th is as important as that on the 7^th as it restores it so that it is really tough to drive down the bottom. When my family moved up to Dornoch in 1983 and I started to play the course regularly throughout the year, it was really quite hard even for the better players to drive down the bottom unless strongly wind assisted. In fact, many preferred not to go down opting instead for the elevated approach from the upper lever from where the green is visible. It was a really good hole. It is similar in some ways to the 17^th which has also lost its way because of technology, but extending that hole is much less easy. A back tee had been added on the 8^th in its current form, but it came back and left so the angle of the slope became more acute and even that did not solve the problem.[/color]
[/size] [/color]
[/size]Now the only strategy unless into a strong breeze is just to blast it down the bottom and have a blind mid to short iron to the green. I am certainly not a long player and that is what I do because it takes the trouble out of play.  A strong and dramatic hole has become one of the weakest on the course. This, of course, is also a risky area of the course and players regularly drive through the group in front, assuming that the way is clear.[/color]
[/size] [/color]
[/size]It is always good to remind people that the 7^th and 8^th were added in 1946 and “designed” by George Duncan whose design credentials were that he won The Open…….   These holes are not priceless untouched gems, which some people assume they are. These alterations are entirely logical and reverential to this course which is very dear to my heart.[/color]
[/size] [/color]
[/size]I am happy for you copy this on any communications.[/color]
[/size] [/color]
[/size]Best wishes and condolences again.[/color]
[/size] [/color]
[/size]Tom[/color]

[Ben Stephens]

I have been looking at this hole on Google Earth


Here are aerial views of the 7th in


2016







2018







2019







It will help you to see the similarities and the differences between the old and new holes

[Jeff Schley]

Thanks Ben for finding those images, gives a good perspective of the changes from above.

[William_G]

thank you Ben for the images

[Thomas Dai]

Worth a look at this recent video of the 7th hole - https://twitter.com/i/status/1261384336177274881
atb

[Bryan Izatt]

If the 7th is to stretch to 464 to 485 yards, the existing tees will need to be moved back some 30 to 40 yards and it is going to be a very long par 4.


Any idea where they would put the new 8th tee?  It can't be back or back left of the green as it would interfere with the view and there's really no room.  If they put it left of the green, say where the little gray/white path goes through the gorse hedge, it would create the proposed dogleg, but the hole would be a another long par 4 at 450+ yards.  Would two long holes par 4's in a row be desirable?  To carry the ridge would be about 245 to 290 yards from right to left, still an advantage to the long hitters.  How many players would be tempted or by accident play down to the 9th fairway.  It's a considerably shorter carry and the second wouldn't really be much longer.  I guess we'll see next winter.

[Ally Mcintosh]

Worth a look at this recent video of the 7th hole - https://twitter.com/i/status/1261384336177274881
atb

Thanks for this. Approach ground looks suitably interesting and not out of keeping. Bunkers look just offset enough to encourage an approach from the right when downwind. Green looks like it sits in place well.

[David_Tepper]

Bryan I. -

The tee for the new 7th hole is almost exactly where the tee for the old 7th is/was. The new tee box has simply been rotated to the right to line up with the new 7th fairway.

My understanding is the new 8th tee will be roughly where the old 7th green is/was. The gorse behind the old 7th green will be cleared out to create fairway turf.

Re: the twitter video linked above - I hope it puts to rest some of the speculation here that the new 7th fairway will be too flat and featureless.

DT

[William_G]

Worth a look at this recent video of the 7th hole - https://twitter.com/i/status/1261384336177274881
atb

looks fantastic
well done RDGC
would love to be there this weekend


cheers

[John Crowley]

If the 7th is to stretch to 464 to 485 yards, the existing tees will need to be moved back some 30 to 40 yards and it is going to be a very long par 4.


Any idea where they would put the new 8th tee?  It can't be back or back left of the green as it would interfere with the view and there's really no room.  If they put it left of the green, say where the little gray/white path goes through the gorse hedge, it would create the proposed dogleg, but the hole would be a another long par 4 at 450+ yards.  Would two long holes par 4's in a row be desirable?  To carry the ridge would be about 245 to 290 yards from right to left, still an advantage to the long hitters.  How many players would be tempted or by accident play down to the 10th fairway.  It's a considerably shorter carry and the second wouldn't really be much longer.  I guess we'll see next winter.

Brian, You mean the 9th fairway. And yes depending on the location and elevation of the new 8th tee that play could be tempting.

[Marty Bonnar]

Not the 9th fairway. That's way beyond the hole! Maybe the area near the 10th green/11th tee. The 10th hole doesn't have a fairway. Actually, a member was wondering the same to me yesterday.
F.

[John Crowley]

Not the 9th fairway. That's way beyond the hole! Maybe the area near the 10th green/11th tee. The 10th hole doesn't have a fairway. Actually, a member was wondering the same to me yesterday.
F.

Yes, The 9th fairway or right rough thereof.
Towards the 10th hole is the opposite direction from the 8th green.

[Marty Bonnar]

Not the 9th fairway. That's way beyond the hole! Maybe the area near the 10th green/11th tee. The 10th hole doesn't have a fairway. Actually, a member was wondering the same to me yesterday.
F.

Yes, The 9th fairway or right rough thereof.
Towards the 10th hole is the opposite direction from the 8th green.

Whoops, sorry, thought we were still looking at the 7th!
F.

[Bryan Izatt]

John,


Quite right, I meant the 9th.  Slip of the keyboard or a brain cramp.  The offending post has been fixed. Thanks.

[Bryan Izatt]

Bryan I. -

The tee for the new 7th hole is almost exactly where the tee for the old 7th is/was. The new tee box has simply been rotated to the right to line up with the new 7th fairway.

If the 7th tee stays where it is then there's no way the hole will be as long as the previously posted video said it would be.

My understanding is the new 8th tee will be roughly where the old 7th green is/was. The gorse behind the old 7th green will be cleared out to create fairway turf.

If the new 8th tee was located in the middle of what is now the 7th green then the 8th hole would be some 25 to 30 yards shorter than I measured but still fairly long.  But a tee there would bring it 30 yards closer to the edge of the ridge.  At that distance I imagine that many more will still be able to drive down to the lower level.  It seems a trade off of keeping drives on the upper level vs making the hole too long.

It could be a long 2nd shot from the upper level - more than 200 yards, but quite dramatic.  But, I must admit to enjoying the blind 2nd shot from the lower level and trying to gauge the run on from the front slope.

Re: the twitter video linked above - I hope it puts to rest some of the speculation here that the new 7th fairway will be too flat and featureless.

DT

[Jon Wiggett]

Bryan,


I thought the same re: distance on the new 7th. Also similar regarding the new eighth tee. I have always maintained that there was enough room behind the old 7th green to have created a new tee behind and to the right to increase the length of the tee shot to the ridge. Still it is a done deal now so it will be interesting to see how it looks once golf restarts in the Highlands.

[Thomas Dai]

There are going to be a lot of photos taken on and around the new 7th hole, green and opened-up ridge-line over the years to come. If someone received £1 for every photo taken they might get pretty wealthy. A few folks will want a bench in that area there too. And then there are the 'right-to-roamer's, the view-seekers and non-golf photographers.
atb

[David_Tepper]

Bryan -

To achieve the distances you state, it is certainly possible the tee box on #7 has been extended back another 15-30 yards, but it is essentially in the same place as the old tee box.

It is also possible/likely the new tee box on #8 will be further back down the old 7th fairway from the old 7th green. Remember the distance of the hole should be measured as a dogleg-right, not directly from tee to green, as the 8th hole now is.

I have been lucky enough to hit the 8th green once or twice from the upper level of the fairway. There is a certain thrill to seeing your ball hang in the air for a while and then land where you were hoping it will. 


Jon -

While the tee box on #8 could have been moved to the area you suggest, it is clear the club wanted to move the 7th hole closer to the edge of the ridge to take full advantage of the expansive view. This could not have been achieved by simply cutting down all the gorse right of the old 7th fairway.

Thomas -

The scenic view of the course from the tee box on the old 7th hole is probably where the majority of on course photos have been taken by visitors over the years. That is usually where I take a picture of the visitors I have hosted over the years. Maybe I should have charged them each a Pound to do so!

DT

[Jon Wiggett]

Jon -

While the tee box on #8 could have been moved to the area you suggest, it is clear the club wanted to move the 7th hole closer to the edge of the ridge to take full advantage of the expansive view. This could not have been achieved by simply cutting down all the gorse right of the old 7th fairway.

David,


I have to respectfully disagree with you about the views. They would have achieved very good and expansive views purely by cutting the gorse down. Indeed, by doing this it would have maintained the secluded feeling of the hole as you would not have seen sown to the holes below and to my mind enhanced the effect.


I am glad you finally accept that there was room behind the old 7th green for tees. I think the big win with the alterations will be 8th which will become a much better hole. I also think the angle of the tee shot will be better from the angle of the old 7th green rather than behind it.


As for 7 I am still of the opinion that at best it will be equal to the old but likely not as good.