[Sean_A]

Okay, so the title is a bit OTT 

I noticed a trend in the Confidential Guide Vol 1...that of Tom being a bit more generous with lesser known courses and a bit harsher on the more well known courses than in the previous edition.  I am sure that part of the reason for this change of attitude is down to a significant difference in age between the two CG editions and therefore life/work experience.  I expect having seen so much, Tom is simply pleased to see anything a bit different, even if it is only a few holes.  Granted, these kind of courses (imagine Painswick etc) can be very dicey to link with a recommendation number, but that comes with the territory.  All this said, I was thinking of courses which Tom rated no higher than 5 which seemed to me a bit harsh.  I looked at several courses and whittled my choices down to five courses which I think Tom might alter his opinion if he saw them again.  What is great about this topic is that he probably won't see any of the courses I list so its all just talk, but I do hope to be led to some smaller courses by folks who pipe up.

1. Alnmouth Village: Arble r = good fall back on course/trip filler/not a course to spend an extra night to play (~ Doak 5)...Doak 2 = a mediocre golf course with little or no architectural merit. 

I am honestly shocked at the score of 2 and I feel sure Tom would seriously reconsider this score if he saw Alnmouth Village again (he saw it in 1982).  I am not saying the course is an all-star, but I do think there is plenty of architectural merit, one excellent hole and well above the average course quality. 

#2


#5


#6




More to follow.

If folks have their own grievances about the lesser courses which you think are considerably better than the Doak appraisal...lets hear about it.

Ciao

[Garland Bayley]

Bude and North Cornwall
http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,59960.0.html

[Tim Gallant]

I tend to agree with Tom on most of his scores, but am almost 100% in sync with Ran's scores (excepting Muirfield, where we differ ).


That said, I think a 4 for Goswick is pretty low. When I think that it is only two points below where I would have it (6), it doesn't seem that egregious. However, just thinking Goswick as a 4 seems wrong. I believe the course has great movement within the land, and some genuinely interesting golf holes. For example, I adore the approach shot into the third hole, where the green is semi-blind in a little bowl. So many ways to play the shot, especially when it is running fast. 5 is a great uphill par-4; and I love the options off the tee on 12, but concede that hole can be like Marmite.

[Sean_A]

Tim & Garland

B&NC and Goswick were 2 & 3 on the list.  I am of the opinion that its awfully difficult for a true links to score below a 5...or at least it should be. 

4. Sherwood Forest: Arble r = good fall back on course/trip filler/not a course to spend an extra night to play.  About a Doak 5, however, I actually think SF is a very solid 6...unlike Doak, I deduct points for price gouging and £85 is harsh.  Be that as it may, the course is really quite good and on a lovely property.   Doak scored the course a 3 (1982)...average golf....if only average golf were this good!

Full Tour
www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,50805.msg1157748.html#msg1157748

Ciao

[Ally Mcintosh]

In Ireland, Tom had Carlow as a 3 way back in his early editions. He did change it to a 4 for the new first edition and suggested that he might have considered a 5 in the back of a photo thread I did.


It’s an easy 5 with potential for a 6 with some work - should be head and tails the best contender in Ireland to take-on the heathlands of England.


On the flip side of the coin, I was a little disappointed he reduced my home course from an 8 to a 7 having not seen it for 30 years. The course has much improved in widening,  clearing of decorative vegetation, firmness and overall turf quality (perhaps the best there is for this) in that time. Current architectural changes I’m far less sure of however. And if they continue to meddle, I might be tempted to reduce it myself.

[Peter Pallotta]

Sean, I don't know hardly anything about the Doak Scores, but admiring holes #5 and #9 at Sherwood and found myself thinking: if you told people -- looking at those photos -- that the course had recently been restored by none other than the Renaissance team, I think most would believe you, and see an excellent course there.
Peter 

[Tom_Doak]

Most of the scores mentioned come from my year overseas.


For perspective, I visited Goswick and Alnmouth Village in the fall of 1982, right on the back of living in St Andrews for two months, and a week in Prestwick and a week in Dornoch and a week in Gullane/North Berwick.  They weren't that impressive by comparison.


I understand the sentiment that all links courses should be a 5 or better.  Some people think all courses should be a 5 or better!  But that would give you no recommendation about which courses to play and which to skip.

[Sean_A]

Sean, I don't know hardly anything about the Doak Scores, but admiring holes #5 and #9 at Sherwood and found myself thinking: if you told people -- looking at those photos -- that the course had recently been restored by none other than the Renaissance team, I think most would believe you, and see an excellent course there.
Peter

Pietro

I need to go back to Sherwood Forest in the summer months.  I am told the course has been improved by a storm which took a load of trees out.  However, the green fee puts me off as Sherwood is Notts lite, but at virtually the same fee.

For perspective, I visited Goswick and Alnmouth Village in the fall of 1982, right on the back of living in St Andrews for two months, and a week in Prestwick and a week in Dornoch and a week in Gullane/North Berwick.  They weren't that impressive by comparison.

Tom

That was part of my point.  You saw so many courses in such a short period of time and as a fairly young man that time is bound to alter opinions.  Hell, I recall a trip I did to the heathlands many moons ago in which I played practically (well maybe all) all the top courses in the span of a week.  It all became a blur, like seeing too many museums in a short period of time.  The one thing which still sticks with me is that I thought the Colt examples seemed quite sameish...too much Colt in a small area...blasphemy! Anyway, I vowed never to do a trip like that again.

But still...a 3 for Sherwood?  Did the pro get on your nerves?  Was the B&B a hole?

Ciao

[Sam Andrews]

I played Sherwood Forest in the summer a few years back and thought it a terrific golf course that required a lot of thought. Easily a 6 if Ashridge is a 6.

[Mark Pearce]

I'd be very willing to argue that Goswick is at least as good as Gullane 1.

[Scott Warren]

I am 35 years old.


I don’t think it’s particulary remarkable or unexpected that course reviews made on a trip before I was born aren’t entirely consistent with what’s on the ground today.


The list of variables involved is lengthy!

[Sean_A]

I am 35 years old.

I don’t think it’s particulary remarkable or unexpected that course reviews made on a trip before I was born aren’t entirely consistent with what’s on the ground today.

The list of variables involved is lengthy!

I can certainly agree with you Scott.  That is the price to pay when sticking one's head above the parapet by writing a number next to a course. Yet, I am thankful that Tom did so.

Ciao

[James Reader]

Tom must have visited Sherwood at about the time I was just joining as a 12/13 year old.   I’ve been a member ever since and confess to having been a bit surprised and disappointed when I first opened the Confidential Guide and saw the rating.


Even though i’ve always loved the course, I would say that it has improved a lot over the past 35 years.  Sean mentioned the tornado a few years ago that brought down several hundred trees, but in fact there was already a tree clearance programme underway and it’s continued since.  As a result the course is now a lot more open than it used to be, and much more of a genuine heathland - firmer and faster and with more heather. 


There has also been a lot of work on the bunkers over the last 5 years or so, which has delivered a significant improvement in terms of the positioning of some and the quality and look of them all.  The overall quality of presentation is better, with the greens in particular now being consistently amongst the best I see each year (thanks largely to the now head green keeper, Kim Kirkham, who has been there for 40 years).


So do I think Tom was a bit harsh - yes, but I can understand some of the reasons why he wasn’t impressed.   I’d like to think that 35 years on he’d have a slightly more favourable view of what, to my mind at least, is definitely a GB&I top 100 course.


(And Sean, if it’s the green fee that’s putting you off, perhaps I could give you the benefit of a reduced guest fee at some point!)

[Sean_A]

James

Thanks for the info and offer!  Were you around when the Pests rolled into town a few years ago?


For the next course  I am going to pull one out of the hat because the quality of Welsh golf in general is badly over-looked:

#5 Borth & Ynyslas.: Arble r = good fall back on course/trip filler/not a course to spend an extra night to play.  About a Doak 5.  B&Y isn't as exciting as Bude, but it is true links and does use what it is given in terms of roads and the shore very well.  Doak scored the course a 3 (1983)...average golf...again, if only average golf were this good! 

#5


#12


Full tour with some very odd winter light.
www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,43575.msg944047.html#msg944047

Ciao

[Jim Nugent]

One of the most controversial Doak scores seems to be the Castle Course.  Who agrees with Tom that it is a 0?  If not, what score do you give it? 

[Sean_A]

One of the most controversial Doak scores seems to be the Castle Course.  Who agrees with Tom that it is a 0?  If not, what score do you give it?

I didn't care much for Castle Course in the main because of drainage issues and some dubiously raised greens (I expect which was for drainage reasons!), but I thought it was much, much closer to great than a Doak 0.  I would give it a very solid 6, but I think even more changes have been made since I saw it in 2011. That said, I don't really understand the definition of a 0.  I see words such as "contrived", "unnatural", "ridiculous sums of money" and "probably shouldn't have been built".  To one degree or another we can say that about a load of new courses, some of which are not even close to the quality and interest of Castle Course.  Its no surprise I think Tom missed the mark on this one by a mile. 

Ciao

[Michael Felton]

One of the most controversial Doak scores seems to be the Castle Course.  Who agrees with Tom that it is a 0?  If not, what score do you give it?

I didn't care much for Castle Course in the main because of drainage issues and some dubiously raised greens (I expect which was for drainage reasons!), but I thought it was much, much closer to great than a Doak 0.  I would give it a very solid 6, but I think even more changes have been made since I saw it in 2011. That said, I don't really understand the definition of a 0.  I see words such as "contrived", "unnatural", "ridiculous sums of money" and "probably shouldn't have been built".  To one degree or another we can say that about a load of new courses, some of which are not even close to the quality and interest of Castle Course.  Its no surprise I think Tom missed the mark on this one by a mile. 

Ciao

My take on the Doak 0 is it's a course that has to be shooting to be a 7+, but winds up missing the mark for some reason. Generally speaking I would expect a 0 to be better than a 1. Just not as good as it should be. I quite enjoyed the Castle Course for example. I don't think it's great, but I don't think it's that bad either.

[Jeff Schley]

I enjoyed the Castle Course when I played it in 2013, however that was my first course playing golf in Scotland and certainly wasn't a true a links.  It was funky as I recall, with several blind holes and some green complexes that were putt-putt like.  The par 3 10th's green was a little over the top for sure.  Many uphill shots as I recall, and would have enjoyed it more if I had a second go at it with some memory or a caddie at least.

I'd give it a 4-5.

[Tony_Muldoon]

 I am of the opinion that its awfully difficult for a true links to score below a 5.

+1


It’s been a while since anyone said it on here, so let me just add Deal is (still) underrated!

One point either way is generally down to preferences but two are open to debate. My book is currently packed away waiting for me to build ‘the library’, so can’t check the new score but didn’t Masa Nishijima give West Cornwall a 3?  Not one of the greats but has a lot of interest and the “start with a 5” for a links applies.

Sean, I agree with your examples (Haven't seen Almouth and I’ve seen but not played Bude and Borth).  At least one course has been raised by 3 points over the years and it’s one where you need another visit to see it’s a 7.
 

That and Ron Whitten’s other comments on the Confidential Guide below.

https://www.golfdigest.com/story/book-review-the-confidential-g

[Kalen Braley]

I would like to think most Doak 0 candidates get 86'd in a place like Scotland before it ever gets off the ground....


....unlike here in the states where a site with severe terrain is picked that in many cases is literally no good for anything else and try to jam a course on it.  Usually ends up being utterly unwalkable with huge distance between holes, many holes are often very narrow, sometimes plays way too close to houses, and in general just really unconventional stuff...but in a bad way.

[Garland Bayley]

What does The CG say about Nairn Dunbar?

[Nicolas Joakimides]

Hello,


I walk the Castle course a few years ago so I really got the time to look at the course. And I felt disgusted after hole 16th 🤢.
Too much was asked to the players, especially on the greens.
So when I read Tom Doak confidential guide, it seems that he had the same feeling!
Nicolas

[Tom_Doak]

One of the most controversial Doak scores seems to be the Castle Course.  Who agrees with Tom that it is a 0? 

Well, the starter of The Old Course agreed with me - I quoted him. 


And probably half the golfers in Scotland seemed to agree, too.  While there are a lot of posters here who disagree with the grade, I've also had a lot of notes supporting it - most of them from overseas.  And keep in mind, I rated it back when there were little pimply mounds of rough right in the landing areas of the fairways, and before the greens had been changed much.


P.S. to Garland - I've never seen Nairn Dunbar.

[Garland Bayley]

P.S. to Garland - I've never seen Nairn Dunbar.

None of the other three have seen it either?

[Tom_Doak]

P.S. to Garland - I've never seen Nairn Dunbar.

None of the other three have seen it either?

Apparently not.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()